Re: [ICANN-EU] IPv6, was: re-chartering this list: draft.

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

Andy and all,

Andy Mueller-Maguhn wrote:

> Christoph wrote:
>
> > 'cybermobbing' is
> >badly overstated here. Quite gross, actually.
>
> Form follows function; but the function of communication
> is to enable exchange of views. I wish we could agree, that
> any debate we have here must make sense itself and not
> be a tool for "I am better than you am cause I know more"
> games.

  Well knowledge is power after all...

>
>
> >The problems we face now with the DNS
> >system are nearly 100% externally caused (mostly by a mix of bad
> >court decisions and legal theories and bad administrative practice),
> >and we can create new TLDs until we are blue in the face, these
> >problems won't go away.
>
> Objection. I agree about the reasons for the current problems,
> but not, that new TLDīs couldnīt solve any problems. I could
> imagine that new TLDīs take place under there own rules,
> policies and legal theories. So, next to the (not so new) idea
> of a TLD ".TM" for the trademark-owners, i could imagine
> ".GPL" for everything under gnu public-license. We could even
> expand these to cultural and religious spaces, like ".ISLAM"
> (btw, they have no copyright & patent-laws ;), ".catholic"
> for everything under Catholic policy and so on.

  Or even .Jesus and .GOD..  Woops! .GOD is taken, sorry...

>
>
> Planet earth is big and I donīt see any reason for putting
> american policies and/or centralised ICANN decisions on the
> whole cultural and economic space internet.

  I agree.  Certainly not exclusively US or centralized
ICANN decisions anyway...

>
>
> So, for it might be quiete difficult, to break up the rules
> on the current TLD`s, it might be a good way to create some
> new ones under those policies and so show up alternatives.

  Good  point.  And one that has been made time and time again
over the past ohhh, 4 or 5 years now.  ICANN has rejected it of
course....

>
>
> >Another example is Jeanette's ideas abou how standardization
> >works. Lutz very early made the point that the authority of
> >organizations like ICANN derive from the technical quality
> >of their results. Bad standards are not accepted in the market.
> >Again Jeanette disagreed, somehow, with some fluff remarks
> >on the influence of techs, without that I really
> >understood her counterposition.
>
> I thought you did agree, that the current TLD / namespace
> handling courtdecisions vs. UDRP/WIPO stuff is bullshit,
> but it is accepted in the market. So I have to disagree:
> just because a standard is bad, it doesnīt mean it is not
> accepted in the market.
>

True.  But if any standard is recognizes widely as bad for very long,
it no longer remains a standard...

>
> best regards,
>
> Andy M.-M.
>
> --
> "chaos will reign" - MPAA lawyer Leon Gold in the lawsuit against 2600 cause of DeCSS
>
> Andy Mueller-Maguhn, andy@ccc.de, Postfach 640234, D-10048 Berlin, Germany
> Key ID 331F9781 - Fingerprint 4996 E00B 317E AA17 9753 4678 9485 AD2A

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