ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga]


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

Re: [ga] Help - Attn DNSO Secretariat, DNSO Archives Missing or n ot resolving/forbidden


Roeland and all assembly members,

  I had no trouble getting to http://www.freeler.nl/ or http://www.dnso.org
but could not reac all of the archives at http://www.dnso.org...
Hence I don't think this is the problem Roeland.

Roeland Meyer wrote:

> I have a problem with general connectivity across the Atlantic. This may be
> the problem. I can't get to freeler.nl either.
>
> |> -----Original Message-----
> |> From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com]
> |> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 6:42 PM
> |> To: Eric@Business.com.VN
> |> Cc: ga@dnso.org; DNSO Secretariat
> |> Subject: Re: [ga] Help - Attn DNSO Secretariat, DNSO
> |> Archives Missing or
> |> not resolving/forbidden
> |>
> |>
> |> Eric and all assembly members,
> |>
> |>   I also noticed this earlier today.  It seems like the
> |> archives that Eric
> |> listed below are still either missing, not resolving or returning a
> |> "Forbidden" error message...  Would the secretariat please
> |> look into this?
> |>
> |> Eric Dierker wrote:
> |>
> |> >  http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> |> >
> |> >  http://www.dnso.org/dnso/dnso/WGs.html
> |> >
> |> >  http://www.dnso.org/dnso/archives.html
> |> >
> |> > In that I do not want to go shopping or wrap gifts, or
> |> proofread fifty
> |> > pages of websites, I was looking up, through my archives, some old
> |> > WG-Review documentation that I thought may be helpful regarding
> |> > Transfers and the at-large.
> |> >
> |> > Alas, I was thwarted in my effort as all of the above
> |> resolve in error
> |> > or a circle.
> |> >
> |> > So then I went to:
> |> >  http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-review/Arc00/
> |> > And alas it was forbidden.
> |> >
> |> > So then I went to:
> |> > http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-review/Arc02/maillist.html
> |> > And I found what I was looking for.
> |> >
> |> > So before you read this could one of you great soles help
> |> straighten out
> |> > those previous links so that common researchers can find what they
> |> > need.  I also believe closed NC list should be open to the public.
> |> >
> |> > But here is what Karl wrote a year ago as a Christmas
> |> present to the
> |> > WG-Review and I believe it most closely resembles my
> |> intention for this
> |> > noble body;
> |> >
> |> >        > 1. Objectives of the DNSO Review Working Group
> |> >        >
> |> >        > The DNSO Review Working Group's objective is to evaluate
> |> >        > the performance of ICANN's DNSO and to propose structural
> |> >        > and procedural changes that will help ICANN's Domain Name
> |> >        > Supporting Organization fulfill its mission of becoming a
> |> > bottom-up
> |> >        > policy coordination body.
> |> >                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> |> >        I have a bit of trouble with the limited powers
> |> implied by the
> |> > word
> |> >        "coordination".
> |> >
> |> >        The DNSO as a body is responsible not merely for
> |> "coordination"
> |> > but also
> |> >        for the *origination* of policy pertaining to DNS.  The
> |> > initiative for
> |> >        such policy might come from within the DNSO itself, by
> |> > unsolicited input
> |> >        from the net community, or by reference from the Board of
> |> > Directors or a
> |> >        question from another SO.
> |> >
> |> >        > The DNSO Review Working Group's objective is to evaluate
> |> >        > the responses of DNSO stakeholders' and to
> |> vindicate that DNSO
> |> >        > would be a structure that will include all of
> |> those who will be
> |> > affected
> |> >        > by the DNS of the future as well as the current Netizens.
> |> >
> |> >        We ought to dispense the concept of "stakeholders"
> |> - particularly
> |> > as some
> |> >        consider that concept to be one of the reasons why
> |> the DNSO is
> |> > stumbling.
> |> >        The DNS impacts everyone on the Internet.  That
> |> first sentence
> |> > should be
> |> >        reworded to begin "The DNSO Review Working Group's
> |> objective is
> |> > to
> |> >        evaluate the responses of interested persons" ...
> |> >
> |> >        > 2. Authority - How this WG has been proposed and created.
> |> >        >
> |> >        > On July 14 the ICANN Board requested the Names Council
> |> >        > to submit its report on DNSO review in its
> |> Yokohama meeting
> |> >        > in July 2000. The report was supposed to be due on Oct. 13
> |> >        > and it has been deferred.
> |> >
> |> >        I might also suggest that any body has an intrinsic power to
> |> > examine its
> |> >        own structures as long as that effort doesn't
> |> interfere with its
> |> > primary
> |> >        duties.
> |> >
> |> >        Thus, in my opinion, the DNSO has always had its
> |> own ability to
> |> > initiate
> |> >        self-review and to make recommendations for improvement.
> |> >
> |> >        > 3. Procedures and approaches
> |> >        >
> |> >        > Review Working Group will explore the concerns
> |> listed below
> |> >        > by online discussion mostly and if it is needed
> |> this group will
> |> >
> |> >        > organize a face-to-face meeting before or after
> |> ICANN meeting.
> |> >
> |> >        At this point I'd like to inject a plea for semi-formalized
> |> > processes,
> |> >        along the lines of those suggested by Mark
> |> Langston, to keep this
> |> >
> |> >        discussion from going off into the weeds.
> |> >
> |> >        > * The DNSO constituency Structure : Examine the
> |> structure and
> |> >        >    propose amendments that will ensure balanced
> |> representation
> |> >        >    of all stakeholder interests in an open, and
> |> transparent
> |> > process.
> |> >                    ^^^^^^^^^^^
> |> >        ...
> |> >        > In the long term, DNSO Review Committee will be
> |> responsible for
> |> >
> |> >        > enhancing more trustworthy working environment in the DNSO
> |> >        > and for ensuring all the stakeholders' voices
> |> should be HEARD.
> |> >                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> |> >
> |> >        Again, that loaded word "stakeholders" - we ought not to
> |> > pre-judge who has
> |> >        a "stake" but rather let people decide for
> |> themselves whether
> |> > they feel
> |> >        that they have an interest they want to protect.
> |> Rather than
> |> > forcing
> |> >        people into pre-conceived, and arbitrary "constituencies" we
> |> > ought to
> |> >        allow people to aggregate (and de-aggregate) into fluid
> |> > coalitions.
> |> >
> |> >        To that end I'd suggest that the last sentence in the above
> |> > quoted
> |> >        paragraph should be:
> |> >
> |> >         "In the long term, DNSO Review Committee will be
> |> responsible for
> |> >
> |> >         creating a more trustworthy working environment in
> |> the DNSO, for
> |> >
> |> >         ensuring that all who desire to fully participate
> |> in the DNSO
> |> > may do so,
> |> >         and ensuring that the points of view and opinions
> |> of all who
> |> > believe that
> |> >         they may be affected by DNSO decisions may be
> |> fairly heard and
> |> > fairly
> |> >         considered."
> |> >
> |> >                        --karl--
> |> >
> |> > My best to Karl and Mark on this almost anniversary of this fine
> |> > contribution.  So many have worked so hard to try and make
> |> this work
> |> > that I do not believe we should give up.
> |> >
> |> > Sincerely,
> |> > Eric
> |> >
> |> > --
> |> > 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
> |>
> |> Regards,
> |> --
> |> Jeffrey A. Williams
> |> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
> |> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> |> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> |> E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> |> Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
> |> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> |>
> |>
> |> --
> |> 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
> |>

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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 >>>