RE: [ga] "They're Coming To Take Me Away. Ha Ha."

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>]

Thanks for your comments, Alexander

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexander Svensson [mailto:alexander@svensson.de]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 9:04 AM
To: ga@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [ga] "They're Coming To Take Me Away. Ha Ha."



Thanks, Marilyn!

Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote on 13.06.01, 23:59:40:
> Okay, ideas for work:     There is a questionnaire from the DNSO on WHOIS.
> How about we post it, and encourage all XXX GA members to fill it in,
> factually.  Small request. But a deliverable.  I know, we all have
opinions.
> I'm interested in facts... let's learn together.

I support this very much, and I'm already trying to
spread knowledge about the survey to groups who are
interested in the Whois issue, but who aren't necessarily
reading mailing-lists or icann-announce lists.

English: http://www.icann.org/dnso/whois-survey-en-10jun01.htm
Spanish: http://www.icann.org/dnso/whois-survey-es-10jun01.htm
German (my inoff.):  http://www.icannchannel.de/docs/whois.htm

Another important issue is .org, another deliverable.
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-org/Arc00/

Last but not least: the At Large Study.
http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum.shtml

> Secondly, how about we ask the GA members what their characteristics are:
> in broad categories, so we can say: the GA is representative of:   XX
SMEs;
> XX Corporations; XX non profits/civil libertarian organizations; XX
> individual concerned about YYY; XX universities; XX... please realize I'm
> struggling with categories... my only purpose for this is to say: let's
see
> if we can say "we are representative and of what, and then we can also use
> the data to recruit... participation.

I'm not so sure about the idea of 'representativeness'
here -- some people are already claiming to represent
organizations with 100,000+ members or worldwide offices.
But if you put in terms of 'characteristics', I would
be interested, too. E.g. how many organizations and
companies from the DNSO constituencies are participating?

> thirdly, I wondered if the GA would agree to schedule itself BEFORE the
> constituencies so that it can be more of a vehicle into the
Constituencies,
> as we "used" to do... [I know, I suffer from being around tooooo long]...
> but that made the GA really more useful/meaningful... means that the
> constituencies don't report in, but instead, take input from...

Are you referring to the 'physical meeting GA' or to the
discussions? My impression from the Stockholm meeting is
that those two are totally unconnected: Very few people in 
the K2 room in Stockholm thought that they somehow 'belonged 
to the GA', and very few people from the online GA were there.
If you are referring to the online GA, I'm afraid the time
pressure both on GA and constituencies will only allow for
parallel work...

> Fourthly, how about inviting a presentation from the IAB/IETF (happy to
help
> to plan) on the issues which are really critical, from technical
standpoint.
> We have started this in the ISPC and BC, and it is really a  great
learning
> and educational experience.  And, of course, we have some folks already in
> the GA who are leaders in these issues... and could ask their help in
> getting very high level presenters...

This probably makes sense in the physical meetings, but
not so much in online discussions where we can (a) link
to papers and presentations and (b) certainly have enough
people with a strong technical background, including the
IETF chair. Additionally, there is of course not /the/
technical standpoint on issues like internationalized
domain names.

Best regards,
/// Alexander

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html