[ga] GA summary 2002-12
This summary covers the DNSO GA mailing list's (and related)
discussions and news between March 26, 2002, and April 02, 2002.
GA list archives are available online at
NOTE THAT THE ABOVE URL HAS CHANGED: A NEW VOLUME OF THE LIST
ARCHIVES HAS BEEN STARTED.
Please feel free to forward this summary as you believe to be
(i) WLS. In a follow-up to the last summary, George Kirikos said:
"The only item I'd have added was a brief mention of the thread
where Verisign has submitted WLS to ICANN (despite opposition by the
RC, and no consensus), as that hadn't been officially mentioned
anywhere else but on this list (i.e. except for the quiet release on
(ii) Request for a Working Group. Danny Younger requested a working
group devoted to the topic of "abuse and deceptive registrar and
re-seller business practices." Michael Froomkin, William X. Walsh
(and several others) agreed that this topic should be "regulated by
the national authorities where a business is located." (Michael's
words.) Marilyn Cade suggested that ICANN should publish the list of
the appropriate entities.
(iii) The Heathrow Declaration. Ross Wm. Rader published a pointer
to the "Heathrow Declaration," "an alternative ICANN reform proposal
crafted by Tucows." There is also a separate mailing list to discuss
(iv) Consensus. Danny Younger quoted Karl Auerbach's "Prescription
to Promote," and asked: "is it time to replace the consensus
process? If so, how to we avoid establishing a structural model
that relegates certain groups automatically to minority status?"
In a follow-up, Karl argued that the current "stakeholder" system of
ICANN "is a simpleminded assignment of people/entities to a voting
bloc (or to observer status) based on one external attribute."
Instead, Karl suggested, "a better approach is to designate some
'atomic unit' of voting" - for instance a single individual - "and
let those units chose for themselves which other units they wish to
be associated on any particular issue." He also points out that he
does not "agree with the assertion of 'greater stake'," and compares
the registry income with the "cumulative 'stake' as measured by the
indirect charges that fall on those who use and pay for domain name
services." Finally, Karl compares all this to the political system
in the US, "in which the voters in most of our public elections are
people and not corporations or other collective entities."
Chuck Gomes of Verisign suggested that "it would be a good idea to
first give 'consensus' a legitimate chance." In particular, he said,
"it is okay if consensus cannot be reached on particular issues."
"That allows for diversity in the marketplace and gives consumers
In a message which should be considered required reading, David
Johnson noted that "any restructuring plan must deal with the
problem of the tyranny of the majority (or even supermajority)." He
emphasized that ICANN's powers "must be based on the 'consent of the
governed'." "The point is NOT to make rules where there is
substantial, principled disagreement from those with a stake. The
point is to NOT make rules where there is such disagreement," he
writes. He also suggests that "there is still a way to shrink
ICANN's mission back to the ... task of attempting to catalyze
agreement on global issues that require coordination." Instead
creating a "global regulator," competition should be introduced at
the registry level, so that the market can "provide the voice for
the 'governed' to be heard'." "That is," he writes, "why it is
important not to allow the development of objective minimum
qualifications for new TLDs to slip off the agenda."
(v) New deadline for structure input. In a message from Louis
Touton to the Names Council (which was also distributed through
other channels), ICANN notes that "comments received after 29 April
2002 are likely to be significantly less useful than those received
by that date." The letter also contains a set of questions the
Evolution and Reform Committee would like to hear views on.
(vi) NC teleconference minutes posted.
Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.org/
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html