[ga] Joe Sims

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

I have informed you recently of the Registrants Constituency preparation 
efforts started at European initiatives. The visit of Joe Sims and other 
elements confirm that EEC, European Industry and Participants are accepted 
as a serious possible threat to the Majors' (ATT/IBM/SAIC/MS) attempts to 
take over the naming plan, as enlighted by former IBM Stuart Lynn's ICP-3 
document, supported by IAB ATT engineers, enacted by Verisign a partner of 
MS in Realnames, surprisingly added to the Accra Agenda. Why no Berkman 
institute in Accra: not to show the reason why Marilyn Cade opposes so 
vehemently New.net or/and the closing of the GA?

In this stary the GA, the ALSC, the IDNO, the gTLD mailing lists are 
important focal points where all of us may consider the best common 
interest of the Internet Participants and show the BoD where reality lies.

IMHO Joe Sims fails to understand the very architecture of the network and 
of the XXIth century society. They want it legally centralised with GAC 
Members being the ICANN "cops" to impose his  contracting strategy to the 
TLD Managers. The nets are not centralized and directed, they are not even 
meshed and managed as the NIC+GAC could propose: they are distributed and 
consensually simultaneously used and provided. They are not a block to 
carve with a few names, they are not  stones to build with, they are just 
sand flowing around blocking points of failure.

What ATT/IBM/SAIC/MS are proposing may look nice, may look sensible but it 
so conceptually outdated than it will not survive. While it survives and 
develops, it will block network innovation by the largest number. It will 
create permanent operation unrest, unstability and lack of security until 
the day it collapses under the market tide, probably at great cost, as a 
faded technology.

If we could organize as structured @large : industries, business, content 
providers, registrants, users, IP owners, in a smooth organization, just 
liberalizing and opening the ICANN existing structure we could cut a common 
Internet Participant deal in the best interest of everyone.

Otherwise it will be a competition unfortunately understood by most around 
the world as "US vs the rest of the world" because the leading opponents to 
people privacy, independance, free naming, technical autonomy happens to be 
seated both in the USA and in their lack of vision.

As a European, as a partner with American, Chinese, Japanese, Australian, 
Brazilean, African, Indian, Pacific, French and European developpers, I do 
not want to be engaged in a so stupid fight into such a waste of energies, 
into such an uncessary dispute of magnitude.

Even if we - all of us except the dinosaurs - will obviously win at the end 
of the day.
Jefsey




   

--
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