Re: [icann-eu] 'The nuclear arsenal'

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Jefsey and all,

  One small point of correction to your comments.  Mike Roberts
is not trusted by the vast majority of the ccTLD community.  He is
also going to be replaced hopefully soon.  IMHO, the sooner the
better for ICANN.

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> Dear Marc,
>
> At 13:45 24/11/00, you wrote:
> >For those who read UK English, there is an analysis of the role the
> >ccTLDs have in the future of ICANN at:
> >http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/14950.html
> >This article seriously looks at the option of routing around ICANN.
>
> This article is quite exact on many points. However it does not
> mention two important points:
>
> -  ccTLDs are united about their relations towards the ICANN. This
>     does not precludes them to have other points of divergence about
>     their local management. So the main point was to detach the
>     "Best Practice" from the contract proposed to the ICANN and to
>     have the amount to be paid to the ICANN in appendix to the contract
>     body. This way there was no more difference needed in the contract
>     text proposed to the ICANN, making their agreement very strong
>     about the points in that article and about a demand of warranty
>     about network stability.
>
>     This means that if the ICANN and ccTLDs positions again are very
>     tough (as indicated in the article) they are not conflicting, if ICANN
>     accepts a CCSO and the TLDs in the RSSAC (route server system),
>     and a simple and fair payment grid. Now, there is already a Pacific
>     oriented ccTLDs++ organisation which is the MINC (multinational
>     domain names) which recently investigated an independent root
>     to support these names.
>
> -  MicroSoft is an important player to consider. Obviously MS has
>     decided to take over ".net" (in naming ".Net" its main Internet
>     product). This means an increased power of NSI and may be
>     an alliance Robert Beyster's people/Bill Gates. The impact on
>     the strategy described by this article is obvious: creating an
>     alternative net is fine, but who would be the leader in the USA
>     (".us" is not quite used) and on ".com", ".net", ".info"? On
>     whose side would it be?  The interest of everyone is that the
>     issue is over by the Melbourne meeting. Exciting!
>
> -  as said to Alexander, the two chairs (Trush and de Blanc) are
>     certainly trusted by ccTLDs. Vint Cerf and Mike Roberts are
>     certainly a match. The @large Directors may also help a lot :
>     this list is read by many. This sounds like a contest: it may
>     really be like a team, we have elected Andy at the ICANN,
>     the other @large Directors represent us, so in a way the ICANN
>     is our's.
>
> >Conclusion: "We're not exaggerating when we reckon that the next few
> >years of Internet governance now rests with the country code reps,
> >who'll decide whether they want to stay inside the tent, or decide
> >that it's cheaper and less bothersome to have their own root
> >system. Taking many of us with them."
>
> Few months.
>
> The bill have to be footed: Petter Dengate Trush said no more
> money from Pacific until this is solved. The delay in getting the
> new President delays the DoC team creation (in any case Becky
> Burr was leaving) and preparation.
>
> Unless the ICANN wants to commit suicide, they should converge
> and find a joint solution. A lot in Melbourne, and no more cheap
> flights from Europe available !!!
>
> Jefsey

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208