Re: [ga] various comments

[t byfield <tbyfield@panix.com>]

by felicitous coincidence, joe's message was #666 is my mailbox. :)

anyway, gary made the point, but i'd like to underscore it. if, as
joe says, the 'stability of the DNS' is the archimedean star guid-
ing all of ICANN's action, that pretty much rules out handing .org 
to neulevel, whose half-parent is dotbombing as we speak. 

cheers,
t

jsims@JonesDay.com (Thu 05/23/02 at 08:20 AM -0400):

> 4.  On the .org example, this is a really good illustration of the
> different roles of the policy development bodies of ICANN and the Board.
> The former are made up of representatives of specific private interests;
> the latter is made up of people who are charged (and in joining the Board
> agree to act accordingly) with representing the public interest as a whole.
> There was lots of work put into this issue by volunteers, but in trying to
> ensure that the appropriate poitical compromises were made between the
> various interests represented, the working group lost sight of the #1 goal
> of everything ICANN does -- the continued stable operation of the DNS.
> There are 3 million registrants in .org, and their continued well-being --
> their right to be certain that their registrations will continue to
> effectively function under a new registry operator -- is and must be the
> principal criteria of any redelegation.  Once that goal is ensured, then we
> can think about other things, although it is hard for me to imagine that it
> would ever be appropriate to charge registrants significantly more than
> cost for the purpose of creating a fund to subsidize someone's idea of a
> good cause.  What the Board said in Accra is:  "Continued stable operation
> of .org is the primary decisional criteria for selecting a new registry
> operator."  In doing so, the Board (whose responsibility to to act in the
> best interests of the entire ICANN community, including in particular those
> registrants that do not otherwise participate in ICANN but nevertheless are
> affected by its actions) simply applied the ICANN mission parameters to
> this particular issue.  You will notice that the RFP documents otherwise
> reflect much of the recommended approach and language.

--
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