RE: ???

[Roberto Gaetano <Roberto.Gaetano@etsi.fr>]

Roeland,

You wrote:

> That's exactly the point. ICAN took NONE of the DNSO application. Rather,
> they assembled their own from the pieces.
> 
I have the impression that ICANN's final decision did not come out from the
blue, but was based on the "Singapore Draft", that is a compromise between
the BMW Draft and the Paris Draft.
It is true that they did not choose any of the two "official" applications,
but it is very important that the two "competing" parties agreed on a common
declaration of principles that was the basis for ICANN's decision.
As I said in a previous message, nobody was completely happy, but very few
were completely unhappy with the decision (probably the people that would
have been completely unhappy with any decision ;>))

>  That kind of does-in the DNSO.ORG
> as they was their reason for existence.
> 
I cannot speak for DNSO.ORG, but my understanding of its charter (and surely
the reason for which I joined the process) was to facilitate the formation
of a Domain Name Supporting Organization, not to crate a permanent
structure.
Now ICANN has taken its decisions, and is in control of the process. ICANN
(not the "competing" parties) called the DNSO General Assembly in Berlin,
and the constituencies will self-organize.
So, there's no reason to continue the DNSO.ORG.

Like the IFWP, that once ICANN formed lost any reason to continue.

>  If ICANN now takes over the
> DNSO.ORG web-site then what does that say to the rest?
> 
It is fairly reasonable to release the DNSO.ORG domain name, now that the
organization who had it will cease to exist.
In fact, it will be the most obvious domain name for the DNSO, should ICANN
decide to use it for a specific Website that will address Donain Names
issues.

>  IMHO, that would a
> dumber move, on ICANN's part, then I would normally give them credit for.
> It seems to me that impartiality is exactly what ICANN is striving for,
> with that move.
> 
Regards
Roberto