[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-d] Interim measures: second thoughts
On 7 September 1999, Jonathan Weinberg <email@example.com> wrote:
> I'd like to raise the question, though, of what happens next, and
>where the DNSO should or can go from here. As Karl points out, ICANN's
>by-laws seem to contemplate that the Names Council will only forward to
>the Board proposals that reflect "community consensus." While the WG-C
>report will not be the end of the DNSO process, I suspect that the DNSO
>will be unable to formulate a consensus recommendation on this issue. If
>so, will that mean that the Names Council can forward to the Board *no*
>proposal for gTLD expansion? That would be ironic, to say the least,
>since the only thing WG-C was ever able to agree on was that there should
>be more gTLDs. Does it mean that any significant group opposing gTLD
>expansion (or favoring only token expansion) can effectively veto that
>process? How do we approach this?
Reporting that the WG was unable to reach consensus is a perfectly valid
option. Yes, it does mean that a group or groups can hold veto power
over the process. This highlights an inherent flaw in the current system.
If so much money wasn't at stake, I'd suggest that technical experts be
appointed to make the decision in light of this report. However, when
those doing the appointing also have financial interest in the outcome,
this is biased and wrong.
I propose that the "no consensus" report go forward, with a strong
recommendation that the issue be remanded to the IETF, so that we
can once and for all clear up any and all technical issues that people
have questioned regarding the expansion. With that out of the way,
the rest is money politics. And that's a lose-lose no matter how
you look at it.
Mark C. Langston LATEST: ICANN refuses Let your voice be heard:
firstname.lastname@example.org to consider application for http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin Constituency status from organized http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA individual domain name owners http://www.dnso.org