Re: [ga] RIPE NCC response to the Lynn Roadmap

["William S. Lovell" <wsl@cerebalaw.com>]

I would heartily concur with this general concept, with one exception.
Who needs ICANN? Why have a "middle man?" All of the ccTLDs
are perfectly capable, through the NIC, of setting up a global system,
now hopefully to include .eu, without having the imperial ICANN make
up a bunch of rules without any global consultation, the ccTLDs don't
like parts of it and refuse to pay ICANN any money, etc. I'm aware
that there are contracts, but these die out eventually (one would hope),
and during that time a truly international authoritative root server
could
be set up, together with all the other paraphenalia.

An organization is formed by X number of countries, and those not there
initially have the choice of whether to join or not.  China has finally got
itself into the WTO, and Iran has just decided to join the Patent
Cooperation Treaty. If a truly workable system that is in fact centered
on the technical aspects of running a global internet, and stays out of
any presumption about managing domain names (did you know that
one can have an internet that has no domain names?) is developed by
the NIC (National Internet Conference), there would be no reason why
any country (ccTLD) would not want to be a part of it, and thereby all
the hassles brought about by ICANN's actions would disappear, along
with ICANN.

Bill Lovell

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

On 07:27 02/03/02, DPF said:
>I am now rapidly approaching the opinion that the ccTLDs should carry
>on forming their own peer association and then negotiate directly with
>the US Department of Commerce to take over ICANN's role with regards
>to any ISO3166-1 entries in the root.

At last :-) But I am afraid this is too late because of ".us" expected size
and signed agreements with au and jp which will be delaynig. Also the
differences among the ccTLDs. And basically because the ccTLDs share the
IANA functions with the gTLDs, the DoC havnig no particular priviledege
except running its own root server system. IANA (once restored) should
serve as a source of master root file for every global root server system.

The only way is to have the ccTLD Managers participaing to their National
Internet Conference boards (NIC). These NIC will  gather national@large
[for legtimacy, dynamism and innovation], consumer organizations, ISPs,
content providers, user association, GAC representative, etc..

The NIC will form an ICANN constituency-orgnization-SO [as you may like]
and will work at being acknowldged as the ICANN/GA. The ICANN contract will
then be replaced by a voted global ICANN  NIC Membership equal to all. This
Membeship will detail the committees/SOs etc.. the different groups of a
NIC will participate to.

This is the normal international structure system/ National structures
gather into a joint international structure of equivalent format. Each with
its own budget. There is no objection to the RIPE and others to enter into
an MoU over that, since it is their own structure.

Jefsey

--
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