ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Re: Timetable and proceedure for vote


On 8 May 2002 at 16:26, Dan Steinberg wrote:


> After mulling it over in my mind for a few days....I suggest the
> slightly modified text as follows:
> 
> The GA asks the the US Department of Commerce to have an open
> competition for the services now provided by ICANN, provided that the
> new competition would address the need to develop an international
> framework for DNS management.  

Despite the fact that I find the second part of this sentence not clear enough, 
I'd  suggest to give it a slightly different turn. In the Green and the White 
Paper, the USG made it clear that it intends to withdraw from DNS 
management. The current ICANN structure has proven to be unhelpful in this 
respect. Schedules could not be met, agreements with key stakeholders not 
to be achieved. A rebid/ open competition aims at comprehensive 
privatization and internationalization....

jeanette

The rationale for asking for a rebid is
> that ICANN has dramatically changed the intitial terms of refence for
> ICANN, and is proposing even further changes. These proposed changes
> have met extensive opposition in the Internet community and go even
> further from the original terms of reference. The rebid would allow the
> DoC to consider both the ICANN board proposal for restructuring,
> alternatives offered by others for managing key Internet resources, and
> provide for a public record of the process for enhanced visibility.
> 
> 
> 
> Darrell Greenwood wrote:
> > 
> > On 5/8/02 at 10:36 AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote :
> > 
> > >On 2002-05-08 04:25:49 -0400, James Love wrote:
> > >
> > >>"The GA asks the the US Department of Commerce to have an open
> > >>competition for the services now provided by ICANN, provided that
> > >>the new competition would address the need to develop an
> > >>international framework for DNS management.  The rationale for
> > >>asking for a rebid is that ICANN has dramatically changed the
> > >>intitial terms of refence for ICANN, and is proposing even further
> > >>changes, which have met extensive opposition in the Internet
> > >>community. The rebid would allow the DoC to consider both the
> > >>ICANN board proposal for restructuring, and alternatives offered
> > >>by others for managing key Internet resources."
> > 
> > I support this text.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Darrell
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 


--
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



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>