[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: DNSO - then what?
- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:58:47 +0000
- From: jeff Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: DNSO - then what?
Roberto and all,
Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> I understand your point of view, when you wrote:
> > The ICANN wants the DNSO to present all views to them in order
> > for them (the ICANN) to make a decision.
> > We don't need the DNSO for that - the views have been here for
> > years, and they're not going away.
> The point, from ICANN's POV, is to have a specific layer to deal with DNS
Yes Roberto, but according to the original thinking and the ICANN
bylaws it is supposed to be contained within the ICANN umbrella.
So, Chris's point is well taken from that stand point. However on
January the ICANN "Announced" that proposals for SO's changed
all of that.
> The reasonment seems clear to me: ICANN will oversee many things, of which
> DNS policy is just one. Let's have the "experts" do it.
And whom are the experts? NSI Possibly? Maybe the IANA? Or is
it the ISOC possibly? Get the point here Roberto?
> In a similar way, the ASO + PSO will "pre-chew" Addressing and Protocol
> issues, and prepare proposals.
The IETF has already been readying a PSO proposal. Where have you been?
> > Let's do it NOW and get on with it, rather than wait another year
> > for the DNSO to be created and all of these arguments to be
> > hashed over again from square one.
> If your point is that you're tired of this game, and you want to see the
> light at the end of the tunnel, I agree with you. But getting rid of the
> DNSO, and proposing to ICANN directly, may generate exactly the same delays,
> because ICANN will not make a step without ensuring that all the
> constituencies have been heard, that there's consensus, that the process was
> open, and so on.
The ICANN has yet to be open. So this diatribe is so much tripe.
> If, OTOH, we have a reasonable DNSO put in place in a reasonable time frame
> (before the summer?), we can have the DNSO take the decision, and report the
> recommandation, to ICANN in fall. At that point in time, DNSO will take
> responsibility for the decision, and if we all are represented fairly in the
> DNSO, ther should (please note the conditional) be no further problem.
Which DNSO are you referring to here Roberto? Certianly not DNSO.ORG?
> > In short - Stop Wasting Time.
> I am not sure that shortcutting the DNSO step we gain time (unless you have
> reasons to believe that ICANN will endorse a consensus proposal in absence
> of a DNSO)
The ICANN really is not in a legitimate position to propose anything unless
or until there is an Individual Membership Organization in place.
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208