Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #434
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Saturday, May 5 2001            Volume 01 : Number 434

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

Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 23:22:43 -0400
From: "Milton Mueller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] re: EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS and AT-Large-Study

The reason At-Large is not part of the GA review is that GA is part of the DNSO and the AT-Large membership encompasses all of ICANN.

The DNSO is only responsible for domain name policy. It has no say in the formulation of, e.g., address policies or protocol parameters. There is a very large class of individual domain name holders who do not exactly fit into the category of any other DNSO constituencies. 

- ---------

Hi all:

I note with interest that the At-Large-Membership is not mentioned in 
a "possible agenda" for ga-review. Although there is no 
membership, nor is there any structure in place for the so called At-
Large-Members, a study is being done to evaluate it.

I suggest that any kind or review of the ga should include analyzing 
its relationship with the At-Large-Membership.

I am also urging members of the GA to provide comments on the 
ongoing At-Large-Study, which after all has to deal with the entire 
representation structure of ICANN!!

www.atlargestudy.org
there is a public comment forum

- --
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: Thu, 03 May 2001 20:56:51 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] re: EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS and AT-Large-Study

Boy howdy are you right on the money.  As a matter of fact a large portion of us do not belong in the GA but we would belong in the at large.  Oh but there is no at large dang, what should the dot commoners do now?  I guess regardless of the white paper, the MOU, the articles
of incorporation, by-laws, letters from DoC and members of Congress, the contract of Services wtih DoC there is no stakeholder representative body.
But if that was the case all of ICANN would be illigitimate.  Wow I hope you and I are wrong.

Sincerely,

Milton Mueller wrote:

> The reason At-Large is not part of the GA review is that GA is part of the DNSO and the AT-Large membership encompasses all of ICANN.
>
> The DNSO is only responsible for domain name policy. It has no say in the formulation of, e.g., address policies or protocol parameters. There is a very large class of individual domain name holders who do not exactly fit into the category of any other DNSO constituencies.
>
> ---------
>
> Hi all:
>
> I note with interest that the At-Large-Membership is not mentioned in
> a "possible agenda" for ga-review. Although there is no
> membership, nor is there any structure in place for the so called At-
> Large-Members, a study is being done to evaluate it.
>
> I suggest that any kind or review of the ga should include analyzing
> its relationship with the At-Large-Membership.
>
> I am also urging members of the GA to provide comments on the
> ongoing At-Large-Study, which after all has to deal with the entire
> representation structure of ICANN!!
>
> www.atlargestudy.org
> there is a public comment forum
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
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: Fri, 04 May 2001 08:35:33 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] 100% certified

- --------------EB523A2EB8556B4347659C1F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

could someone please explain what this little bit about certification
means.

Sincerely,

- --------------EB523A2EB8556B4347659C1F
Content-Type: multipart/related;
 boundary="------------90452B027A67F66877BD7FAF"

- --------------90452B027A67F66877BD7FAF
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
could someone please explain what this little bit about certification means.
<p><img SRC="cid:[email-masked]" BORDER=0 height=78 width=291>
<p>Sincerely,</html>

- --------------90452B027A67F66877BD7FAF
Content-Type: image/gif
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="C:\DOCUME~1\EDIERK~1.HI-\LOCALS~1\Temp\nsmailU9.gif"

- --------------90452B027A67F66877BD7FAF--

- --------------EB523A2EB8556B4347659C1F--

- --
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: Sat, 5 May 2001 08:49:24 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Alternative roots

Hi John

Thank you for your posting on the subject of Alternate Roots.  I have been
promising to get back to you to discuss your comments and I'm sorry I have
been a little busy.

As you may know, we have now set up a new mailing list on this very topic.
I believe that members of that list will be interested in your comments so I
am taking the opportunity to repost your comments to that list.  I hope you
don't mind.

Should you wish to subscribe yourself, you can do this by sending "subscribe
ga-roots" in the text part of an email to <[email-masked]>.

I welcome your participation.

Best wishes
Patrick Corliss

- --
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: Sat, 5 May 2001 10:12:52 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] AMM's notes from the Melbourne GAC meeting

From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: Bret Fausett <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 3:20 AM (AEST)
Subject: [icann-eu] AMM's notes from the Melbourne GAC meeting

I don't think I saw this link on this list or on any of the usual
sites so far:

<http://www.ccc.de/~andy/ICANN/Reports/20010309MMN-GAC.txt>

- -- 
Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/

- --
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: Sat, 05 May 2001 22:55:47 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] the Role of the Markle Foundation

Rejected once again. :-(

***************

Dear Applicant:

Thank you for your interest in the Salzburg Seminar's ICANN Travel
Support Project.  We regret, however, to inform you that the Project cannot
support your participation at the June meeting in Stockholm, Sweden.

The Project received a large number of qualified applications
and we were not able to accept as many candidates as we would have
liked.  We also regret that we are unable to respond individually to
applicants with reasons for their non-acceptance.

We hope that you maintain your interest in ICANN.

With best wishes,

Salzburg Seminar
**************
For the sake of transparency,
yours truly,

- --Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  
the Cyberspace Association and 
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
Elected representative.
http://www.idno.org  

- --
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 #434
************************