[ga] GA-ROOTS - Denial, Dismissal and Dogma.

["Alternate Chair" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 19:59:13 +0200 (CEST), Marc Schneiders wrote:

> Well, now we are not even supposed to discuss alt roots anymore in the
> DNSO. Or did I get that wrong?

You are very sharp, Marc.  I had to think about it for a while but came to
the same conclusion as you did.  It may be worse than we anticipate.

(1)    The Names Council is looking to save money.  That's what they say,
anyway.  I see that as quite false.  In fact, yesterday's webcast made in
quite clear they had a "slush fund" which they could draw on if needed.  And
ICANN should fund them, anyway.

BTW Was I mistaken or did Verisign just cough up $100,000?  What was that
for?  And what did Verisign get in return?  Do you believe pure generosity
of spirit !!!

(2)    There is censorship afoot.  Purportedly because of (1) the Names
Council wants to close down some lists.  They already suggested closing
GA-FULL and I reckon that's just being held over until after the Sotckholm
conference.  The one sublist that was really taking off was GA-ROOTS.  So
naturally naysayers attacked it -- a good excuse.

(3)    Alternate Roots !!  Probably the most critical issue to face ICANN in
the world today.  In fact, they have the potential to completely undermine
the whole structure.  And I really don't care if it is having *right now* --
it certainly COULD and I think WILL.  But the argument is that the subject
is *out of scope*.   Perhaps a standard line from ICANN staff.

But it's a clever trick.  It means that the Names Council CAN and almost
certainly WILL close down the GA-ROOTS mailing list at any time they like.

(4)     The ICANN CEO, Stuart Lynn came up with his own policy statement.
This received mixed reviews but they were mostly negative.  Apart from the
content, I think he made several mistakes in his approach.  But he's new to
the job and doesn't quite understand all the dynamics yet.  My guess is that
Kent Crispin wrote the statement and Stuart appended his name afterwards.
Whatever the truth the ICANN view is quite clear.  Wrong but clear ;-)

If he had any sense, he would have arranged for ICANN to pay my airfare to
Stockholm and then sat down with the General Assembly, the SOs and all to
thrash out a "bottom-up" statement.  Instead he chose to take the ICANN
staff approach -- denial, dismissal and dogma.

Putting the lack of funding together with the "out of scope" argument, and
lack of support from ICANN, it is inevitable that the Names Council will
move to scrap the GA-ROOTS mailing list as soon as it can be arranged.

And that will be sooner than you think.  Maybe Monday.

One more point.  It has been argued that my intention in setting up a Roots
mailing list was to "capture" the debate.  More FUD.  Moving the debate to a
separate list just "allowed" the debate room to breathe.  It also sheltered
the main GA list from a lot of hostility.

Yes, they will ban GA-ROOTS.  It's a certainty.  But neither ICANN or the
Names Council can stop the debate on the subject of Alternate Roots.  All
that will happen it that it will continue to dominate the discussion on the
main GA mailing list.  Where it was before.  A very untidy resolution.

But the debate will continue where it matters.  Out there in the DNS !!

Best regards
Patrick Corliss






--
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