Re: [ga] Good News

["Pascal Bernhard - cube" <pbernhard@cube.de>]

Jeff, Eric and all assembly members,

On 28 Nov 2001, at 22:45, Jeff Williams wrote:

> Eric Dierker wrote:
> 
> > I have reached a LOI in which I gratuitously threw in the GA and AL
> > importance to a company that will be reaching out to millions, no not
> > spam but a commercial enterprise that will both have WWW presence and
> > physically reach a global market.
> 
>   ORSC, New.Net, INEGroup(Many web sites for instance) and a few
> others kinda beat you to the punch by about 1 1/2 years.  But we hope we
> will be glad you are going to be on board!  >;)

Jeff, I'm not sure what board you mean. As far as my experience with 
alternative roots reaches, all are trying to push their own system on 
the market. Information exchange takes just place, when somebody 
decides "to be kind" with someone else. To be kind means 
instrumentalize the other one for the own aims. I don't wanna be 
destructive, but the reality is: alternative roots don't have a real 
common censensus until today.

As divided systems, they are too weak to have a real weight in the 
balance with ICANN, even if ORSC has 40 Mio. hits. What's a hit, 
anyway?

> > You see some interests want a non-profit legitimacy and I lied
> > and said this reference to the GA and AL would give it to them.  Nope
> > nothing official but a guaranteed million hits a day by May 2002.  It
> > is so sweet - it will just say "do you want to be a part of running
> > the worlds' Internet click here" Of course it will include things like
> > You could be the next General Assembly Chair or you could sit on the
> > BoD of ICANN"
> 
Dreams... There is one thing, the alternative roots should understand. 
A root system is just so much worth as ISPs resolve it. I don't mean 
ISPs like John Doe in Smithvillage but real carriers and ISPs: MCI, 
ECRC, ATT and the like or very used networks like AOL. If anybody 
is able to bring one of them to an new root system, then there is a 
weight in the balance and that one can discuss with ICANN.

> > You see it is a catch 22.  No one in ICANN wants participation but by
> > properly offering it there is nothing ICANN can do about it.
> 
>   Except what you propose above, if any example, is not proper or
>   legitimate.

Jeff, what legitimation has ICANN anyway? ICANN is based on a 
contract with the DoC and ICANN doesn't fulfill this contract. 
Furthermore, a contract with the US DoC legitimes ICANN in the US 
but not in Mexico, Lichtenstein, Iraq, UK or Germany. If anybody 
want's to create a company supporting a root server system and 
creating a kind of customer decision voting procedure, it is legitimate.

> > Oh sorry that is BAD NEWS for many of you, but what the heck you are
> > not getting anything done in the meantime.
> 
>   We are building new networks every week.  How is Hi-Tek doing?

You see: division. _That_ is the one reason why ICANN can do 
things as it does.

Regards,
Pascal

================================
Pascal Bernhard
cube
Geschäfte werden von Menschen gemacht...
pbernhard@cube.de
http://cube.de/
http://boroon.de/
FON: +49-6352-753725
FAX: +49-6352-753726
Mail: Im See 3 - 67295 Bolanden
--
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