ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Another committee of cronies?


At 04:54 PM 8/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Kristy wrote:
>
>>understanding.  The
>>IETF has not been a technical standard setting body for a while now as we
>>all are working with other groups who do require technical skill,
>>knowledge, and understanding.
>
>
>May I know which are the other more authoritative Internet standard 
>setting bodies that pop up every now and then on this list as alternative 
>to the IETF (and maybe an estimate of the share of the market that follows 
>them rather than the IETF as guidance for products and services)?
>As a former employee of a telecom standard making body, I am just curious 
>about the answer. Personally, I suspect that on this list we lose track of 
>the dimension of the reality: a couple of dozen people should be 
>representative of all Individual Domain Name Holders, a posting with a 
>couple of "me too"s should be adopted by ICANN as a consensus policy 
>statement, a team somewhere that nobody else has heard about may become 
>the authoritative Internet standard setting body, the small percentage of 
>users of the alternate roots should have priority over the A-root, and so on.
>Quite interesting, methinks.

Yeah, yeah, ...  a couple dozen folks should not represent all IDNHs and 
using "me too's" as consensus may be laughable; however, I was hoping the 
DNSO would create a constituency for IDNHs like they have for the other 
groups.  And I was shocked when looking into the DNSO a couple/few years 
ago to discover that there was no representation for the largest group of 
netizens.  This concerns me and many others.  The GA is not representative 
of those people in the same fashion the ccTLD represents the country code 
top level domain holders, for example.

[IETF] Two great examples of what you are looking for are the W3C and the 
IEEE.  I don't know about their market share; but I do know that their 
suggestions do not conflict with themselves, whereas the IETF has many RFCs 
that are in absolute contradiction with each other as we have seen proof of 
when communicating about Authoritative Roots, etc.  Additionally, if we 
attend a meeting with either of these groups, technically astute people are 
participating.  We sent a visitor to the IETF's meeting held in Minnesota 
this year who recognized there were very few technical people present.

:)

~k


--
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



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>