[ga-roots] ga-people-who-have-pipe-dreams@dnso.org

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Hi! WXW,
This time I am sorry. I though you might be realistic. I see that you use 
the word only to fight it. Too bad.

I think I remember someone having said "I had a dream..." and I feel that 
dream progressed a lot. May be it was in another name space than yours. But 
it is in mine.

Jefsey


On 13:57 19/06/01, William X. Walsh said:
>Hello Jefsey,
>
>I see that you are part of the ga-people-who-have-pipe-dreams@dnso.org
>group.  I'll recommend that list be created for you people.
>
>We need realists who can work to get actual work done.
>
>If your only position is that ICANN is bad, and needs to go, then you
>really have no reason to be here.
>
>Go do your own thing, and if ICANN will fail, let it.  Then you can
>come in and say "I told you so."
>
>So if you really believe all this, I have to ask why you are still
>here?
>
>Tuesday, June 19, 2001, 2:16:43 AM, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
>
> > Dear WXW,
> > I am agreeably surprised by your response to Chris. I however
> > disagree with your evaluation of the need of the $ 50.000: the Yokohama
> > document was much more flexible and allowed Mike to reduce or to
> > suppress it on a case by case basis. Actually I think all the problem
> > is really in the response of Mike to my proposition to donate the ".sys"
> > project. The flexibility was forgotten then and the unique model you
> > and the Staff has now in mind was allowed to the detriment of innovation.
>
> > Future will probably show bug.biz a failure and real .biz by Leah a
> > delayed and reasonable success. So your test for reasonable check
> > by money level would have failed. We will see. The more I go the
> > more I see that your US weakness is to judge of the suitability of
> > a project by its initial financing capacities. I accept that your whole
> > culture and tax system make that reasonable ... in a standard US
> > situation where all the parameters are under the consistent US
> > system. This really changes outside Fort America and with
> > international innovation.
>
> > On 08:53 18/06/01, William X. Walsh said:
> >>As someone who has had to deal with bureaucracy at its finest, all I
> >>can say is that you have to face that change doesn't happen quickly.
>
> > This is interesting. Which bureaucracy? For what matters? You seem
> > to actually have experience but if your culture is American, this is a
> > country of where bureaucracy is in essence really different from others.
>
> >>And the best way to get the change is to recognize some of the
> >>realities that can't be changed now, and completely dropping them in
> >>order to focus on the things that CAN be changed.
> >>
> >>That is not capitulation.  That is recognizing that the brick wall is
> >>WAY Too thick to bust through with your head, and the best way to get
> >>there is to tear it down, brick by brick, layer by layer
>
> > Well, this is a constructive, yet restricted way. I would say pragmatic.
> > But, IMHO, this is giving the iCANN a worldwide technicwide historywide
> > importance it has not. My basis are not so far from yours, but I think the
> > best way is:
>
> > - to correctly asses the iCANN reality: the USNIC with a general US
> >    tendency to consider the rest of the world as the 51st state followed
> >    by a genuine yet often awkward effort to correct that.
>
> > - to operate oneself as if the iCANN was operating as it should
>
> > - in so doing challenging and helping by the example the iCANN to
> >    better fulfill its own charter.
>
> > iCANN is nicely welcoming us in an US environment (frankly I do not
> > give a damn about the Californian law and the US tax regulations). This
> > way it may benefit from us and we my benefit from you. Good. But
> > this has to grow up or we will never address the problems at their
> > roots and they will proliferate.
>
> > - the USNIC as well as he EUNIC must develop
>
> > - the US centered concerns of the iCANN must be transferred to the
> >    USNIC. For example AFNIC, DENIC, etc... have their own zone
> >    servers. The USNIC should not be a mix of world and NSI interests.
>
> > - the National and Market Internet Communities have to be clearly
> >    identified and structured under the lead of the ccTLDs (.us included).
> >    They should include @large representation at national level too, giving
> >    them and the iCANN a real legitimacy.
>
> > - a TLD BP document should be worked among roots - and the
> >    iCANN could be a natural leader for that. To give some consensual
> >    ground to the Name Space organization.
>
> > - the iCANN should then be either rebuilt as an international
> >    body or just be reshaped in accepting NICs and MICs  (National
> >    and Market Internet Communities) as Members forming its GA.
>
> > There are some very few other changes to discuss and fix (the
> > SO and in particular the three User SO (Individual, Organized,
> > and Geographical). But basically the current bylaws permit to
> > make that job. So with a very limited effort and an open proper
> > vision by Stuart and Vint, the whole thing is still be workable.
> > Will they accept it, this is another story....
>
> > To end this, I think there is a capital element where you and I
> > may help a lot, it is the professionalism and the innovation of
> > the open root offer. It is conceptually necessary that the iCANN
> > discusses with the Open Roots. But it will be very hard for
> > them if they do not meet people and operations at least equal
> > or bringing them a plus. So instead of a capitulation which has
> > no reason to be, it has to be a joint progressive and professional
> > opening to innovation. Benefiting to Registrars, otherwise you
> > will see a TLD blooming. Working out better open root services
> > and structures is of the essence: so the iCANN and others RSCs
> > (root service centers) may enter in a positive coopetition.
>
> > Jefsey
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>Best regards,
>William X Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
>Userfriendly.com Domains
>The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
>DNS Services from $1.65/mo

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html