[fwd] Re: [ICANN-EU] Stay @large candidates (from: jefsey@wanadoo.fr)

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

Mis-addressed.

----- Forwarded message from Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr> -----

From: Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>
To: Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:23:08 +0200
Subject: Re: [ICANN-EU] Stay @large candidates
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2

Dear Thomas and all,
I just came back from vacations and spent the night reading
this ML exchanges and DNSO [ga]. I felt asleep: please wake up!

1) IMHO few of the candidates read about the ICANN history,
     bylaws, duties etc.. In my understanding ICANN has never
     been about democracy, but about democratic results. Dr.
     Postel has never been elected. Why would we? This election
     is biased. You quoted several points: I will add three: how
     many people received their PIN? Why only 5% of the
     German voted yet? Can we consider as "democratic"
     the voter split per country?  ...  And then? We known before :-)!

2) IMHO this election is a "stay @ large" operation.
     The ICANN's charter is to proceed by consensus. They test
     if they may still fake a consensus whith a large audience
     (they hoped to have only 5.000 voters. They sent 35.000 PIN
     in time; but this is large for them). If they can their interest
     to see EUROCANN,  ASIACANN, etc. emerging and protecting
     them (this is what you do with your projected ML.)  If this is
     not possible the ICANN will become a governance:
     a stable body, with minimum interferences, protected by the
     GAC. So if we are active: they will make us a local comity
     supposedly supporting "our" (single) director. If we are not
     they will have their own candidates elected.

3) I never read anything in here about the ICANN most important
     job:  the IP addressing plan. They have no money for it, nor any
     competence and experience and billions of IP addresses to
     organize to respond banking, telephone, ISP, etc.. industries;
     governments demands, justice requirements, privacy obligations
     etc... In regards TLD are peanuts and will be long forgotten
     while the IP addressing scheme mistakes will still create far
     more important problems than today DNS.

4) I read and reread things about domain names, WIPO, etc...
     There is no other problem about DNS, domain names, etc..
     than the DNSO. I am sorry Roberto, but the DNSO mostly
     spent its time talking about its own organization and now
     about checking the way it is organized. There are far more
     important issues (the drift the DNSO allowed will be a real
     problem):

     - how is it possible (looking into the bylaws) that the ICANN
       may organize its TLD rigmarole? Did you vote for it? What
       were the results? Where is the consensus?

     - why as not the DNSO elaborated for the BoD about the
       meaning of the "unique root" concept by IA Blair and RFC???.
       This lack of explanation is leading to a costly dead end. Millions
       spent on ".com" domain names are worth nothing and some
       day the bill will have to be footed by the ICANN/DNSO.
       Not in money but in credibility and probably at the NASDAQ
       (the .com economy is ill named).  The idea is "if there were
       several roots, people would not go to the page intended by
       the author". Good! this is exactly what value added is about:
       "depending on the root I sell you your users will go where
       the author wants them to go, or where you want them to go".
       There is a new industry there.
     - the only job for the ICANN is to make sure the Root System
       works properly. Good. God bless them! There are months I do
       not use it anymore. Did you make sure you still use it:
       Bill Gates could have made your IE to use the MSRoot
       System, you would not know. Do you know if your ISP uses
       it? Try existing hundreds of altenative TLDs: you might be
       surprised.

     - a domain name is only a private convention established
       between a site and its users, helped by the registry through
       their semi private service of maintenance of the private host.txt
       file. There are many potential services offerings. What has
       the WIPO to do with them? The confusion should
       have been cleared a long ago. The IP problems only result
       from the undue commercial use in a country of a registered
       trade mark in the national online service class (unfortunate,
       but cybersquatters are right!).

5) I read about the expenses. We need the ICANN to have money
     to achieve its job (mainly IP addressing, DNSO Root System,
     as the default root). This money will be either private or public.
     If you want the public money not to step in you have to pour
     over private money. The ICANN understand it with their K$ 50
     forced ill worked out donation scheme. The issue is not to
     know if the candidates will get or not travel expanses, but if
     the budget necessary to their first class travels (they work for
     you for free) will come from smart and honnest or from stupid
     and illegal schemes like the K$ 50 one. Or am I wrong?

6) I read concerns about national ML, language issues, unfair
     advertising, personal attacks, etc... IMHO we are in the real
     world. Our duty is to face these problems in an efficient way
     not to lock them out?

7) I also found considerations about private interest, ISP costs,
     cookies, privacy, etc.. I feel all them are of real interest and
     very appropriate, even if they may interest only one or two
     persons. The ICANN must be a secretariat for consensus.
     Fro that it needs competent peace makers: difficulties may
     arise from anywhere during negotiations. Having BoD members
     with interests and competences in every network fields is of
     the essence. We cannot claim that current BoD misses
     competences and not try that next BoD Members are
     competent on the widest number of subjects.

I apologize for being long and probably icannoclast. If we want
this ML to survive as a possible euro-governance partner, we
need it to be active and imaginative.
All the best to you.

Jefsey Morfin
http://utel.net/jefsey.htm


----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
Thomas Roessler                         <roessler@does-not-exist.org>