Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #9
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST         Wednesday, February 23 2000         Volume 01 : Number 009

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:57:29 -0400
From: "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Matters to discuss ... Am I a member?

I've been listening to this noise for a long time, and trying diligently to
find some substance in here. Also waiting to post until I had something of
substance.

I think i  am a member of the GA-
I know I am the admin of .VI
I know that i've been physically present at all the GA meetings
I know that i was the scribe  at one of the meetings (that NI Quanor
chaired), was it Santiago, or LA? ( old-timer's disease kicking in ;-)  )

Do i need a digital ID?

NO. I know who i am, thank you, and I AM a member of the GA, as much as
anyone can be.

Let's not get so technoid that  we  dis-enfranchise those who don't know the
techno-lingo.

It's difficult enough to even find, or think of finding 5000 people without
all these barriers to entry. Please keep it simple.

Peter de Blanc  PJD6
.VI admin

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Jeff
Williams
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 1:28 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Joe Kelsey
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss

Joe and all,

Joe Kelsey wrote:

> Harald Tveit Alvestrand writes:
>  > - Who are the GA members?
>  >    - What is the definition of a GA member?
>
> The DNSO GA shall consist of individuals who apply to be recognized as
> members.  The member recognition process must attempt to weed out
> "personas" from real people.

 Of course, what you are suggesting would be a shift or change from what has

already been done or is in effect currently with the exception of some
actions
that certain members have taken to in violation of the current documented
and obviously excepted method.

If a change in this policy is warranted or desired I offer the following
response
to your suggestions Joe:

  Of course this should be done in as much as it is possible.  In some
countries
this not feasible however.  Many of us here know this.

>  The basic recognition process must
> associate a specific e-mail address with a specific, verifiable person.
> The only way to do this currently is to use a PKI certificate signed by
> a recognized signer which validates physical identity before creating
> the certificate.

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

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:22:35 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss ... Am I a member?

Peter and all,

Peter de Blanc wrote:

> I've been listening to this noise for a long time, and trying diligently to
> find some substance in here. Also waiting to post until I had something of
> substance.
>
> I think i  am a member of the GA-
> I know I am the admin of .VI
> I know that i've been physically present at all the GA meetings
> I know that i was the scribe  at one of the meetings (that NI Quanor
> chaired), was it Santiago, or LA? ( old-timer's disease kicking in ;-)  )

  Good points here Peter.  I agree to a great extent.  It was not my intent
nor did I believe that my comments were overly  verbose.

  I also KNOW I am a member of the GA as well.  I know that James
Touton, Bob Davis, David Jenson are also members of the GA.  Yet
it seems that Harald and Roberto, most especially Harald don't know this.
That is really is what is at the crux at this "Noise" to which you accurately
refer to.  Too much rhetoric, short on specifics of substance....

>
>
> Do i need a digital ID?
>
> NO. I know who i am, thank you, and I AM a member of the GA, as much as
> anyone can be.
>
> Let's not get so technoid that  we  dis-enfranchise those who don't know the
> techno-lingo.
>
> It's difficult enough to even find, or think of finding 5000 people without
> all these barriers to entry. Please keep it simple.

  I think this is wise and prudent personally.  But the question of
identification
seem to be wanting to be used as a barrier to entry or is sincerely a concern
for reason or reasons not clearly articulated to date.

>
>
> Peter de Blanc  PJD6
> .VI admin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Jeff
> Williams
> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 1:28 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: Joe Kelsey
> Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss
>
> Joe and all,
>
> Joe Kelsey wrote:
>
> > Harald Tveit Alvestrand writes:
> >  > - Who are the GA members?
> >  >    - What is the definition of a GA member?
> >
> > The DNSO GA shall consist of individuals who apply to be recognized as
> > members.  The member recognition process must attempt to weed out
> > "personas" from real people.
>
>  Of course, what you are suggesting would be a shift or change from what has
>
> already been done or is in effect currently with the exception of some
> actions
> that certain members have taken to in violation of the current documented
> and obviously excepted method.
>
> If a change in this policy is warranted or desired I offer the following
> response
> to your suggestions Joe:
>
>   Of course this should be done in as much as it is possible.  In some
> countries
> this not feasible however.  Many of us here know this.
>
> >  The basic recognition process must
> > associate a specific e-mail address with a specific, verifiable person.
> > The only way to do this currently is to use a PKI certificate signed by
> > a recognized signer which validates physical identity before creating
> > the certificate.
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 10:04:22 +0100
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Matters to discuss ... Am I a member?

At 23:57 21.02.00 -0400, Peter de Blanc wrote:
......

>Do i need a digital ID?
>
>NO. I know who i am, thank you, and I AM a member of the GA, as much as
>anyone can be.
>
>Let's not get so technoid that  we  dis-enfranchise those who don't know the
>techno-lingo.
>
>It's difficult enough to even find, or think of finding 5000 people without
>all these barriers to entry. Please keep it simple.

My wish too. As simple as possible - but no simpler.

On the other hand - if I were to register the nonexistent persons hta1, 
hta2 and [email-masked] as GA members, and claim voting rights for them 
- - what would be the mechanism we could use to grant you voting rights, and 
deny it to the nonexistent persons?

Some people argue strongly against "challenge when suspected", because it's 
inherently unfair (loud cheaters get caught, quiet cheaters don't). Others 
bemoan the cost and privacy invasions of any across-the-board ID validation 
scheme.

It's a tough question, IMHO.

                         Harald

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[email-masked]

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 12:06:18 +0100
From: Mark Measday <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss ... Am I a member?

Harald,

Is is possible to publish a list of current subscribing members, frequency of
posts etc?

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> At 23:57 21.02.00 -0400, Peter de Blanc wrote:
> ......
>
> >Do i need a digital ID?
> >
> >NO. I know who i am, thank you, and I AM a member of the GA, as much as
> >anyone can be.
> >

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 12:47:01 +0100
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss ... Am I a member?

At 12:06 22.02.00 +0100, Mark Measday wrote:
>Harald,
>
>Is is possible to publish a list of current subscribing members, frequency of
>posts etc?

We can't publish a list of current subscribing members' email addresses, 
since we promised not to ("who is not public"), and we don't have anything 
else about them to publish.

We could certainly publish frequency-of-posting statistics if we wanted to; 
that's a simple archive scan.

                    Harald

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[email-masked]

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 14:08:53 +0100
From: Mark Measday <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss ... Am I a member?

Who did you promise it to?  Can I find the list of this and other resolutions?

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> We can't publish a list of current subscribing members' email addresses,
> since we promised not to ("who is not public"), and we don't have anything
> else about them to publish.
>
> We could certainly publish frequency-of-posting statistics if we wanted to;
> that's a simple archive scan.
>
>                     Harald
>
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> [email-masked]
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
_____________________________________________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the ordinary user of
the e-mail address to which it was addressed and may also be
privileged.  If you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may not
copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any
form whatsoever.  If you have received this e-mail in error please
e-mail the sender by replying to this message.
______________________________________________________________________

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 08:16:14 -0800
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss

On Mon, Feb 21, 2000 at 03:03:37PM +0100, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> Now that the list is a quiet place to work, it would be a shame if we still 
> couldn't get any work done.......
> 
> the immediate questions confronted by the GA (and therefore valid items for 
> discussion on the GA list) are:

[various process issues]

On the other hand, we could discuss some actual business, instead of 
the endless stuff about process.  Here's what I think is a real 
business item:

I would like to call people's attention to 

http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc03/msg00428.html

entitled "[council] DNSO budget proposal".  I reproduce the salient 
parts, below:

> Staff
> * 2 persons:
> - 1 Senior Assistant Elisabeth (1/2 time)
> - 1 Junior Assistant (full time)
> - Sub contracts for the technical tasks (< engineers)
> 
> Salaries: 75  000
> Charges and Offices accomodation: 75 000
> 
> * Web Hosting/Machines/Connectivity: 25 000
> * Teleconference: 20 pers x 2hours x 25tele/year  15 000
> * Travels: 10 000$ x 2 persons 20 000
> * GA Chair + Alternate chair:
>   Only Travels and telephone are paid. 20 000
> * Unexpected 10 000
> * Accounting and Billing 5% of all expenses 12 000
> 
> TOTAL ~ 250 000U$
> 
> Benefits:
> 
> 125 000 to be paid by Constituencies
> 125 000 to be paid by ICANN
> 
> To be negotiate with the ICANN Board
> Names council = the travels and arrangements? Who is paying?
> All public meetings : 4 annual meetings + webcast to be charged to ICANN +
> Legal advice if needed
> 19 Persons in NC

With some exceptions, these costs seem high.  I am especially concerned
because, bluntly, some constituencies have much more money than others.
But perhaps more important than the cost per se is the basic appoach 
being taken -- different constituencies have different ways of
getting work done; some depend a great deal on volunteer efforts.

- - Concerning "Web Hosting / Machines / Connectivity": In the US *very*
full-featured web hosting can be had for < $100/month, with multiple
email lists, and so on.  More directly, excellent colocation space can
be had for ~$500/month -- that would include space for two powerful
machines, which would give a complete redundant backup.  High quality,
powerful server machines can be had for about $3000 each. 

- - What are the tasks that the full-time junior assistant would 
perform?  Currently I know that maintaining the DNSO site occupies a 
great deal of Elisabeth's time, but there must be a bunch of new tasks 
predicted for this new person, and it would be good to know what they 
are -- I am having a hard time imagining what they might be.  

- - Since there is a lot of overhead in office space, I wonder if
economies might be achieved by using ICANN's office space, instead of
separate office space.

Finally, I have a more general concern -- "lockin".  If there is 
anything we should all be *very* aware of, it is the danger of 
committing yourself to a single vendor for provision of service.  
Please understand that I think that Elisabeth has done a great job.  
But if we are transitioning from a volunteer service to a hired 
service, then we must consider things from a different angle.

Kent

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 17:19:42 +0100
From: Mark Measday <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Am I a member? How can I know I am a member if there are no  other members known?

Harald,

Ok. I'd like to suggest that for reconsideration at some point, but I do remember
the debate and was in favour of getting your ruleset in operation.

However, consider the following. The primary conundrum of early 20th century
mathematics was set theory, a form of membership. If you recollect the formulation
A = { X | X is not a member of X }. and the question:- Is A an element of A? - both
the assumption that A is a member of A and A is not a member of A lead to a
contradiction, leading to Russell's attempted restatement and Godel's
contradictions  The set construction itself appears to give a paradox. If the
primary conundrum of the 21st century is a similar problem of trust in cognitive
entities, to have secret members of a virtual group; although widespread, AOL
style;  seems to imply the same problem when it becomes normative, with the same
scepticism and disbelief as a result.

Best,

MM

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> At 14:08 22.02.00 +0100, Mark Measday wrote:
> >Who did you promise it to?  Can I find the list of this and other resolutions?
>
> Ruleset message.
>
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc03/msg00447.html
>
> relevant text:
>
> "The membership of the lists is not made public."
>
> This was debated a bit before we adopted it.
>
>                  Harald
>
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> [email-masked]

- --
_____________________________________________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the ordinary user of
the e-mail address to which it was addressed and may also be
privileged.  If you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may not
copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any
form whatsoever.  If you have received this e-mail in error please
e-mail the sender by replying to this message.
______________________________________________________________________

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 12:57:54 -0500
From: "Ben Edelman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Suggestions for ICANN-Cairo Remote Participation?

As most of you no doubt already know, ICANN has asked the Berkman Center to
webcast and facilitate remote participation for its upcoming Cairo open
meetings.  I'm leading the effort to do so, and I welcome suggestions from
GA members or anyone else interested.

Current plans call for tech quite similar to what was used in Los Angeles: A
video webcast (with two cameras this time, for faster transitions to reduce
distracting panning) along with audio backup (in case of network problems in
Cairo).  Remote participation via text comments, with all comments posted in
the meeting archive and selected comments read outloud and displayed on
screen.  Web-based and IRC-accessible chat among remote participants.
Scribe's notes, PowerPoint presentations and other documents referenced
available on the web.  And a full online archive -- including all documents,
video, questions, chat logs, online and physical participant list, and basic
remote participation statistics -- produced primarily during the meeting and
available at the conclusion of each day.  (See
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la/archive> for a general sense of the
archive.)

Many of these enhancements -- the addition of chat, and the two-camera video
system, to name two -- result from suggestions from prior remote
participants.  Though I can't promise that I'll have time to follow up on
further suggestions before the meetings only two weeks ago, I'd welcome any
suggestions members of this list might care to offer.

(If you'd like to receive announcements about participating remotely in
ICANN's Cairo meetings, be sure to sign up via
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/cairo/preregistration?r=ga-0222>.)

Ben Edelman
Berkman Center for Internet and Society
Harvard Law School

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 13:15:38 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss ... Am I a member?

Harald and all,

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> At 23:57 21.02.00 -0400, Peter de Blanc wrote:
> ......
>
> >Do i need a digital ID?
> >
> >NO. I know who i am, thank you, and I AM a member of the GA, as much as
> >anyone can be.
> >
> >Let's not get so technoid that  we  dis-enfranchise those who don't know the
> >techno-lingo.
> >
> >It's difficult enough to even find, or think of finding 5000 people without
> >all these barriers to entry. Please keep it simple.
>
> My wish too. As simple as possible - but no simpler.

  Exactly right, I agree.  I think this is what Peter meant as well...
Peter, am I right in saying this?

>
>
> On the other hand - if I were to register the nonexistent persons hta1,
> hta2 and [email-masked] as GA members, and claim voting rights for them
> - what would be the mechanism we could use to grant you voting rights, and
> deny it to the nonexistent persons?

  You can only use one E-Mail address with unique "Message ID" would
determine this.  The software used as a voting mechanism can easily check this.
That is at least one way to eliminate this particular problem, Harald.
There are others though.  Hence the suggestion that I an David Jenson
made in that the DNSO must assign a E-Mail address for each participant
when subscribing to the list, making sure to check "Message ID" when they
do subscribe.  That should address your and others concern here as well
adequately enough, and not have a need for PKI necessarily.

>
>
> Some people argue strongly against "challenge when suspected", because it's
> inherently unfair (loud cheaters get caught, quiet cheaters don't). Others
> bemoan the cost and privacy invasions of any across-the-board ID validation
> scheme.

  Challenge is fine, but is not legal in the US and other countries.  Hence
making it
a non-workable and non-exceptable method unless you can guarantee privacy
of those challenged and the challenge also applies to everyone.  This has not
been
done as you well know.  Hence making this method problematic at best.
Therefore an uninterested third party should be involved here in order for this
method to be creditable.  That, as far as I am aware, is not in place presently.

>
>
> It's a tough question, IMHO.
>
>                          Harald
>
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> [email-masked]
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 14:43:19 -0500 (EST)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss

These are excellent points.  I might add that so far as I am aware few of
the ICANN bodies have made sustained attempts to secure volunteer aid in
kind instead of in cash.

For example, I imagine that both ICANN and the DNSO could find volunteers
to take over design, maintenance, and perhaps even hosting of their web
pages.   But AFIK they have never asked - there's nothing visible on the
web page as far as I can see, for example.  There are of course issues of
ownership and control, but these surely could be worked out.

Lean and mean, please.  And competitive tenders too.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2000, Kent Crispin wrote:

> the endless stuff about process.  Here's what I think is a real 
> business item:
> 
> I would like to call people's attention to 
> 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc03/msg00428.html
> 
> entitled "[council] DNSO budget proposal".  I reproduce the salient 
> parts, below:
> 
> > Staff
> > * 2 persons:
> > - 1 Senior Assistant Elisabeth (1/2 time)
> > - 1 Junior Assistant (full time)
> > - Sub contracts for the technical tasks (< engineers)
> > 
> > Salaries: 75  000
> > Charges and Offices accomodation: 75 000
> > 
> > * Web Hosting/Machines/Connectivity: 25 000
> > * Teleconference: 20 pers x 2hours x 25tele/year  15 000
> > * Travels: 10 000$ x 2 persons 20 000
> > * GA Chair + Alternate chair:
> >   Only Travels and telephone are paid. 20 000
> > * Unexpected 10 000
> > * Accounting and Billing 5% of all expenses 12 000
> > 
> > TOTAL ~ 250 000U$
> > 
> > Benefits:
> > 
> > 125 000 to be paid by Constituencies
> > 125 000 to be paid by ICANN
> > 
> > To be negotiate with the ICANN Board
> > Names council = the travels and arrangements? Who is paying?
> > All public meetings : 4 annual meetings + webcast to be charged to ICANN +
> > Legal advice if needed
> > 19 Persons in NC
> 
> With some exceptions, these costs seem high.  I am especially concerned
> because, bluntly, some constituencies have much more money than others.
> But perhaps more important than the cost per se is the basic appoach 
> being taken -- different constituencies have different ways of
> getting work done; some depend a great deal on volunteer efforts.
> 
> - Concerning "Web Hosting / Machines / Connectivity": In the US *very*
> full-featured web hosting can be had for < $100/month, with multiple
> email lists, and so on.  More directly, excellent colocation space can
> be had for ~$500/month -- that would include space for two powerful
> machines, which would give a complete redundant backup.  High quality,
> powerful server machines can be had for about $3000 each. 
> 
> - What are the tasks that the full-time junior assistant would 
> perform?  Currently I know that maintaining the DNSO site occupies a 
> great deal of Elisabeth's time, but there must be a bunch of new tasks 
> predicted for this new person, and it would be good to know what they 
> are -- I am having a hard time imagining what they might be.  
> 
> - Since there is a lot of overhead in office space, I wonder if
> economies might be achieved by using ICANN's office space, instead of
> separate office space.
> 
> Finally, I have a more general concern -- "lockin".  If there is 
> anything we should all be *very* aware of, it is the danger of 
> committing yourself to a single vendor for provision of service.  
> Please understand that I think that Elisabeth has done a great job.  
> But if we are transitioning from a volunteer service to a hired 
> service, then we must consider things from a different angle.

- -- 

A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [email-masked]
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                        -->It's warm here.<--

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 21:14:53 +0100 (MET)
From: Mikael Pawlo <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] *IF* ICANN fails what about UN?

So many voices claiming the failure of ICANN I wonder what the
alternatives to a self-regulatory body would be?
Could the UN host a body like this? Or will ICANN be replaced by a USGOV
body?

It's good to know what the alternatives are. For my own part I think the
failure contestants are somewhat early in their conclusions, and I still
think ICANN has a fair chance making it.

Regards,

Mikael

_________________________________________________________________________

  ICQ:35638414                                mailto:[email-masked] 
                                              http://www.pawlo.com/

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 20:27:12 -0000
From: "Dr. Nii Quaynor" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss

> I take it we all agree that the GA members are human beings, acting for
> themselves (no corporations as GA members, one man = one vote)?
> And that we accept the risk that some organization with ten thousand
> members might want to sign them all up to the GA and "take it over" - that
> it's so unlikely this would happen that we don't see a reason to guard
> against it?

ten thousand members (human beings) more is good for GA irrespective of the
organizations they belong to.

nii

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 22:52:21 +0100
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss

At 08:16 22.02.00 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:

>[various process issues]
>
>On the other hand, we could discuss some actual business, instead of
>the endless stuff about process.

but then, when we have discussed the business, what can we do about it?
Talking is fine. But at the moment, we don't have a handle of what an 
"action" by the GA is, far less how to achieve one.

(that said, I have little to say about the budget; it seems like a rush 
job. Webhosting is cheap - anyone could host the DNSO webservers on a spare 
Pentium/100 - the only real cost there is time. But you can spend infinite 
amounts of time on web maintenance. And that's expensive.)

                    Harald

- --
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[email-masked]

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 15:50:55 -0800
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss

On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 02:43:19PM -0500, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
> These are excellent points.  I might add that so far as I am aware few of
> the ICANN bodies have made sustained attempts to secure volunteer aid in
> kind instead of in cash.

NCDNHC has no money, so everything it does is through volunteer effort.

> For example, I imagine that both ICANN and the DNSO could find volunteers
> to take over design, maintenance, and perhaps even hosting of their web
> pages.

I think that is largely true for DNSO, but I don't think so for ICANN.  
ICANN has a much higher level of fiduciary responsibility than the DNSO 
- -- for example, it provides the authoritative list of UDRP proceedings.  
Volunteer efforts are wonderful, but there is no doubt that they are 
not as accountable as paid labor.

>  But AFIK they have never asked - there's nothing visible on the
> web page as far as I can see, for example.  There are of course issues of
> ownership and control, but these surely could be worked out.

I think a central core of services will have to be controlled by ICANN 
fairly closely.  But there is a great deal of very important stuff that 
could be safely be distributed to volunteers, or other organizations.  
That is sort of the supporting organization model, actually.

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 15:59:37 -0800
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Matters to discuss

On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 10:52:21PM +0100, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> At 08:16 22.02.00 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> >[various process issues]
> >
> >On the other hand, we could discuss some actual business, instead of
> >the endless stuff about process.
> 
> but then, when we have discussed the business, what can we do about it?

By design, we, as "the GA", can't do anything about it.  It doesn't 
make any difference at all what processes we put in place -- the 
fundamental hooks are simply not there in the bylaws.

> Talking is fine. But at the moment, we don't have a handle of what an 
> "action" by the GA is, far less how to achieve one.

Without modifications to the bylaws, there are no meaningful actions
possible by the GA.  The term GA is about equivalent to the term IETF --
the IETF almost never takes action on its own -- everything is done by
working groups, the IESG, the IAB, etc.  The GA list is like the IETF 
list -- decisions aren't made there.  That doesn't mean that it is a 
waste of time to discuss things on the IETF list, though.

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 17:56:42 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] lawyers can at times be suck clowns - or the future of the [email-masked]

Joe and all,

  Agreed to a point.  The software that they are using is from Duke University
called "Web Board".  Not very easy to use as a standard Mailing list is
much better.  I have informed Diane Cambell of that short coming.  I also
noticed that very few if any are participating.  I think this is because the
software
is as you indirectly indicate, and I have passed on to the Berkman center and
Diane that it is not very useful.

  I would say that the idea is good one and does offer a much more open
discourse platform.
To Wit:
"One part of the deliberative process is education; however, software for this
purpose is readily available. Text, audio and video files can all be downloaded
to provide briefing and other
background information; therefore, the Berkman Center's report will not focus
on the
delivery of introductory educational materials. Nor will we consider in-depth
methods for
selecting a statistically representative sample of the community; for this
phase of the
Open Governance study, we are assuming that any individual can join the
discourse,
given minimal authentication of identity. Instead, we are focusing on the
challenges
unique to deliberation, namely the ability to freely discuss an issue, to
clearly hear
dissenting      viewpoints and to find an acceptable resolution that is
considered valid
and authentic by the community."

  I would be nice and prudent for the DNSO to adopt this approach, which it
once
had prior to recent questionable practices.

!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:

> I see the Berkman boys have been doing extreme work with their tools.  And
> the Markel Foundation is paying for it.  This "software" should be
> somewhat entertaining.  I do have serious doubts it will amount to
> anything of value - except for more ICANN/IBM/Berman propaganda.
>
> Little Ben Edleman our Berkman resident control freak and all purpose lier
> in training must be having a ball with this one, as it looks like an
> attempt to gain control of the processes.  For all it worth - here's the
> data on this.
>
>  * Open Governance--a New Framework for Deliberative Democracy: As part of
>  our effort to encourage civic participation in Internet governance,  the
>  Berkman Center is working to create a specification for software for
>  online deliberation, grounded in the theory of consensus and discourse
>  generally. Sponsored by the Markle Foundation, the specification is for
>  use in the deliberative processes of the Internet Corporation for Assigned
>  Names and Numbers (ICANN) but also to facilitate deliberation on other
>  issues of importance to online and offline communities, and for education.
>  We are sharing our work-in-progress in order to solicit substantive
>  feedback from the Internet community at large. Follow the link below to
>  learn more:
>
>       <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/projects/deliberation/>
>

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #9
**********************