[announce] GA Summary April 3 to April 9, 2002
This summary covers the DNSO GA mailing list's (and related)
discussions and news between April 3, 2002, and April 9, 2002.
GA list archives are available online at
Please feel free to forward this summary as you believe to be
(i) RIR contracts. Jefsey Morfin forwarded a message from Ray Plzak
of ARIN in which the RIRs make an assuring statement on the state of
contract negotiations with ICANN, and indicate that "as a sign of
good faith [...] the RIRs will release one half of" the funds kept
in escrow "to ICANN."
As an update to this, Bret Fausett's icann.Blog points to a draft of
a "Relationship Agreement", which was posted on ICANN's web site.
(ii) Final statement of NAIS. Rob Courtney posted the NAIS group's
final statement to the GA list, which states that the group's work
is "largely complete."
(iii) Transfers. The Transfer Task Force's work showed up in
discussions at various points of time; I'll restrict the summary to
those postings which consisted of something else than rhetorics.
Danny Younger forwarded a message Patrick Mevzeck had sent to
the registrars' list. The message suggests that investigation of a
subject's "apparent authority" to initiate a domain transfer should
be outsourced to some accredited provider - like what happens with
UDRP as well.
Joanna Lane suggested that the "bankruptcy clause" should be removed
from the transfer policy, and that this should be an issue with
which the transfer task force should deal. In a follow-up, William
Walsh noted that "this issue is not the reason why the transfer task
force was created." He suggested that the bankruptcy clause "can
wait." Marilyn Cade suggested that Joanna should draft questions
related to that issue for the transfer task force's survey.
(iv) NC teleconference on April 4. The agenda and the MP3 recording
(v) Skeleton structure. Alexander Svensson posted a skeleton
structure. The document consists of two parts: "The first part is a
hopefully less controversial layered skeleton structure.
Additionally, there is a proposal on splitting responsibilities into
three recognizable parts which separate budgets. Be prepared to like
the first and dislike the second part or vice versa," Alexander
(vi) Policy development. I posted a rough outline of a moderately
modified task force process for policy development, which assumes
that (a) membership is restricted to stakeholder representatives,
but not names council members, and (b) uses staff instead of
(naturally biased) volunteers for the chair's and editor's jobs.
Michael Froomkin responded that "the difficulty of doing this right
is one of the most powerful arguments for decentralization and
parallel processing. ICANN's sole job would be to prevent
inconsistent outcomes [...]."
Danny Younger suggested not to use task forces, and rely on the work
of WG-D instead.
In order to bring more structure into that debate, I also posted a
rough list of parameters for policy making. Alexander Svensson and
others added various comments, and pros and cons. A summary of some
of these is available as a large table
Part of the discussion also covered the question what size a working
group or task force can realistically have, while still working.
Alexander argued that his "personal impression is that the maximum
size for such a group is somewhere at 15 or 20 persons, regardless
of the tools used."
(vii) Reseller/registrar (mis-)behavior and ICANN mission. Danny
Younger forwarded a message on a reseller causing massive SPAM. He
concludes that "if registrars take no action to police their own
industry, and if they are not held accountable for the actions of
their re-sellers, then this industry is surely begging for the same
type of governmental intervention that impacted the
telecommunications industry." Danny's suggestion is that ICANN
should help to bring "resellers acting as loose cannons" "under
There were several posters who disagreed, and argued that
anticompetitive and illegal behavior of resellers and registrars
should be left to traditional authorities which are already
responsible for dealing with it.
Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.org/