Re: ITU and BIND configs (Re: [ga] GA position on Verisign contract)

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 23:13 1/04/01 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

>
>Please.....if the DNS (as defined by RFC 1035 and associates) had been 
>slightly different, it would not have been the DNS.

Exactly. Too often we forget what enormous economic value has been created
with the fundamental concept of the DNS. 
Not a "National" value, but still a value that needs to be overseen,
(governed) and where inevitable conflicts need to be resolved, fairly and
in a way that overcomes the paralysis of  being unable to sort out national
jurisdictions.

No matter how much we may hate lawyers and hope that technical solutions
can be written instead of legal ones, this is fundamentally wrong. 
The technical solution providers are not supposed to be dictators and what
the lawyers are supposed to provide is a framework for stakeholder
participation.

This was the premise of the White Paper on which ICANN was founded, but
which it has not yet fulfilled.
Individuals have participated in good faith, but......

>And if men were more friendly, we would have less anger.

Indeed. 

>So what?
>
Always try to remain friendly :-)
So much more gets accomplished.

--joop



--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html