Re: [ga] Motion asking for GA poll on rebid of ICANN contract

["James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Elisabeth Porteneuve" <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>
To: <ga@dnso.org>; <james.love@cptech.org>; <jo-uk@rcn.com>
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 3:33 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Motion asking for GA poll on rebid of ICANN contract
>
> Jamie,
>
> Was ICANN put in place by the sole action of the US DoC ?
>
> Elisabeth Porteneuve

     Pretty much in the beginning....  The US DoC wants to have an
international framework for managing the DNS, and the White Paper and the
handpicked ICANN board was the Clinton Administration solution.  After the
Lynn proposal, there is a big debate over where everything should go next.
What will be ICANN 2?   We would like to see the various DoC ICANN contracts
rebid, so ICANN 1 can present its final version of the Lynn/Board/staff
plan, and others can present different ideas.   Right now there are many
proposals floating around that are quite different from the
ICANN/Board/Staff proposals, and I believe, have much more support in the
Internet community.  For the most part, the alternatives would have either
more of a public/user role in electing the ICANN board members, or would
dramatically reduce ICANN's centralized power making.   In a new
competition, we would go back first principles about DNS management, and not
necessarily have to work around the edges of the Lynn proposal.

   People who oppose a rebid can vote against it.  This is not binding on
anyone.  But a vote would let everyone, including DoC and the ICANN board,
what people think.   I don't know why there is so much opposition  to voting
( by the public) in ICANN.   It is certainly is *not* the case there there
exists a consensus in favor of the basic Lynnn plan, but that is where the
DNSO and the ICANN board is headed.   I think a vote would be interesting
and important.  It should take place fairly soon, certainly before the end
of May, so people who care what we think, can at least have some better
measure of this.  .

Also, it seems like a flaw if the Chair of the GA can simply block these
votes based upon his personal views.

 Jamie

--------------------------------
James Love mailto:james.love@cptech.org
http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040



--
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