[council] Finalization of "A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS"
- To: <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: [council] Finalization of "A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS"
- From: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>
- Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 17:59:08 -0400
- Cc: <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, "Karl Auerbach" <karl@CaveBear.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: email@example.com
Fellow Name Council members:
Whatever one's opinion of this document's substance,
it is a completely illegitimate exercise. The staff has no
authority to unilaterally declare that something is a policy.
Policy in this matter is quite explicitly the purview of the
DNSO, according to corporate articles and bylaws.
I would like to know on what basis ICANN staff decided to
completely bypass its own DNSO in drafting this so-called
This document was not even voted on by the ICANN Board.
What makes this all the more egregious is that if ICANN
management had respect for its own processes, it would
probably get something very like the same policy through
the DNSO. My own dissenting views are (probably) in the
minority at this point. But apparently staff are so
fearful that its made-up policies cannot stand up to the
light of open discussion in a neutral forum that it has to
bypass any process at all.
Why are you afraid of open debate and discussion of this
issue in a working group? Do you lack confidence in the merit
of your ideas?
>>> Louis Touton <firstname.lastname@example.org> 07/09/01 04:41PM >>>
The paper on "A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS", released for
discussion in May, has been finalized based on the various comments and