ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


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

Re: [ga] Motion # 1


To Ross and everyone else who has weighed in on this: we are now in the
debate/discussion stage, and I don't see that there will be any rush to a vote.
Having a "#1" implies that there might well be a "#2" and so on. Any of us is
free either to propose a "#2," or suggest an amendment to the present #1,
or whatever seems to be necessary. That's how this bit is supposed to work.

My own bent here, as soon as I get the time to do it, is to lay out a "Bill of
Particulars" that would put more meat into Joanna's "whereas" clauses, so
we'll see how that goes.  ICANN is not going away, and some concerted
effort by all of us on this will show ICANN that neither are we.

The object of all this work will be to generate, we hope, a single motion
that everyone will agree is the one that ought to be taken to a vote. In
the process of generating that motion, the actual merits will undoubtedly
need to be bandied about, especially to include some of the excellent
suggestions that have been made as to defining, up front, the actual
purpose of the motion, but we might bear in mind that all we are doing
at present is generating the best possible motion; we are not at present
doing any voting on it.

:-)

Bill Lovell

Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
01c701c1f832$d0cc2ea0$040a000a@RRADER2K">
I am firmly against taking this motion to a vote.

There has been zero consultation or discussion on the merits, or lack
thereof, of the proposition and as such cannot even remotely be taken as a
representative question.

While I am sympathetic to the need for immediate and decisive action,
sufficient consensus on the text of the motion does not yet exist to a
degree that warrants taking this to a vote.

-rwr


----- Original Message -----
From: "Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>
To: "GA List" <ga@dnso.org>; "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 11:02 PM
Subject: [ga] Motion # 1


WHEREAS the Internet Corporation for Assigned names and Numbers (ICANN)
has
dramatically changed the initial terms of reference for ICANN, and is
proposing even further changes.

WHEREAS these proposed changes have met extensive opposition in the
Internet
community and go even further from the original terms of reference.

WHEREAS a new open competition would allow the U.S. Department of Commerce
(the DoC) to consider both the ICANN Board proposal for restructuring, and
alternatives offered by others for managing key Internet resources, while
providing for a public record of the process for enhanced visibility.

WHEREAS the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain name Supporting
Organization
(the DNSO) also reminds the DoC, that in the Green and the White Paper,
the
Government of the United States made it clear that it intends to withdraw
from management of the Domain name System (the DNS).


It is hereby RESOLVED that:-

The General Assembly of the Domain name Supporting Organization of
Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) asks 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. An open competition should aim
to achieve comprehensive privatization and internationalization of DNS
services, consistent with the need for stability, but also innovation,
competition and freedom.

Agree [ ]
Disagree [ ]
Abstain [ ]

--
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





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