Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #507
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Saturday, June 2 2001            Volume 01 : Number 507

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

Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 03:15:28 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Not digital divide

When we meet with a high ranking government official, and my CTO starts
going off on technical matters effecting internet usage I nudge him and
he quickly winds down.  Government policy people are quickly tired of
technical matters.  When I meet with a technical compliance officer and
start going off on political and social ramifications of IPv4 vs IPv6
issues my CTO nudges me and I wind down quickly. (yes I used the fairly
technical issue of 4's and 6's to show it is often a gray area)

Us political policy type people and us technical logical type people
have to find a common ground.  We are fighting amoung ourselves when our
ultimate goal is the same. This allows the monopolistic manipulators to
DIVIDE and conquer.

I think we can do this by putting out some goals and agreeing on them.
Then both sides can place methods by which the goal can be reached. Then
we can synthesyze these into a common cause and show a united front on
moving forward. Policy is not science at best it is social science, and
technical people have to give way a little to common ignorant
misconceptions as driving forces on the Internet. The ICANN BoD and
Versign know this and have capitalized on it.

We are clearly dominated by the technical pursuasion in this list yet
it's mandate is really policy from a bottoms-up (and the bottom ain't
highly trained sophisticated professionals).  There has not been one
simple policy oriented document from this list.  But by it's members
there have been many sophisticated techinical papers of great
importance.

No great urgency just a small attempt to try to get us to be effective.

Sincerely,

- --
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, 01 Jun 2001 06:07:22 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Privacy concerns EU - COUNCIL OF EUROPE REVISES CYBERCRIME TREATY

All assembly members,

On May 25th, the Council of Europe released the latest version
of its Draft Convention on Cybercrime, entitled "Version No.
27 Revised."  It immediately met a hailstorm of criticism from
privacy advocates who say it lacks sufficient assurances of
privacy protection. The Draft will be submitted to the
European Committee on Crime Problems on June 18th and could be
ratified by member states by the end of 2001. The 113 page
treaty would set legal rules and guidelines for such things as
obtaining information from Internet Service Providers, tapping
and collecting Net traffic and content data, the extradition
of cybercriminals and international collaboration among law
enforcement authorities. Any state which ratifies the treaty
must amend its national laws to conform to the treaty. The
final draft treaty may be found at
http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/EN/cadreprojets.htm

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
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: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 09:10:23 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] ICANN...Stuart Lynn Explains Himself

Stuart Lynn Explains Himself

 http://www.icannwatch.com/

/Bruce

- --
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, 01 Jun 2001 12:03:36 -0400
From: "David G. Post" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN...Stuart Lynn Explains Himself

At 09:10 AM 6/1/01 -0500, Bruce James wrote:
>Stuart Lynn Explains Himself
>
>
>  http://www.icannwatch.com/
>
>/Bruce

[cross-posted to BWG-Friends and elsewhere]

FWIW, I have posted the following on ICANNWatch 
(http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=188&mode=&order=0) and at 
the ICANN public comment forum.
David

************************************
David G. Post     Temple University Law School and The Tech Center, 
George Mason Univ. Law School
[email-masked]
215-204-4539 or 202-364-5010
http://www.temple.edu/lawschool/dpost.html
http://www.icannwatch.org
*********************************************************************

June 1, 2001

To:     Stuart Lynn, ICANN
From:   David Post
Re:     Your Discussion Draft (28 May 2001) "A Unique Authoritative Root
for the DNS"

         You have asked for comments concerning the ideas that you have put
forward in this draft.  There are any number of points that you make
that are worthy of serious discussion in the Internet community; I will
confine myself to a small number of comments about what I regard as the
most serious and far-reaching of them.

    1.  From the Abstract:  "Although the Internet allows a high degree of
decentralized activities, coordination of the assignment function by a
single authority is necessary where unique parameter values are
technically required.  Because of the uniqueness requirement, the
content and operation of the DNS root must be coordinated by a central
entity."

This is, simply and most profoundly, incorrect.  The analogy - and it
is as precise an analogy as one can ask for - is to language systems
generally, or any naming system (e.g., the system of 'biological
classification' under which species are given their proper 'names').
[Click a href="http://www.temple.
edu/lawschool/dpost/TheFreeUseofOurFacultiesFinal.PDF" here/a if you
would like to read a more comprehensive development of this argument].
The rules of the English language give names to objects - table, chair,
domain, computer ... There is a "uniqueness requirement" if we are all
to understand one another with precision; if  you call the object on
which I am writing this note a "tomato," and I call it a "computer," we
will not be communicating very efficiently.  Confusion and chaos will
reign.

But somehow we muddle through without a central coordinating entity.
It's amazing, no?  You and I can somehow communicate with one another -
not perfectly, not without ambiguity, but reasonably effectively. All
without an authoritative source of definitions!  Sure, there is a great
deal of confusion in this system; there are innumerable private
languages, dialects, jargons, etc. out there, and navigating through
them all is a complex task. But that is the price we pay (and we must
pay) for the evolution of the languages we speak. Not only do we take
for granted that we do not have a central coordinating entity - some
ICANN-like agency that tells us which words we need and which we don't,
or how conflicting uses are to be resolved - we take for granted that
such an entity would be a catastrophe for the continued richness of the
language itself.

If I want to set up an "alternative naming system," I do not need
Stuart Lynn's permission or anyone else's; I am entirely free to do so -
subject, of course, to the constraint (an only to the constraint) that
my new system will only be effective to the extent I can convince other
English-speakers to use it.

If you think that you have a better plan for English, I respectfully
suggest you're wrong.  Many people throughout history have thought they
had better plans, by the way.   ICANN has its predecessors.  The 18th
century saw a vigorous debate about the need for a central coordinating
entity for natural languages - and ICANN lost that debate.  The
pronouncements of the Academie Francaise about "authoritative" French
usage had, let us not forget, the force of law at one point in time;
and well-meaning and deeply intelligent people thought we needed such a
"central coordinating entity" for English as well.  (John Adams among
them; Adams proposed an equivalent Academy of English, to check the
"natural tendency" of language to "degenerate," to the Continental
Congress).  History has shown the misguided nature of these efforts,
and it will show the misguided nature of ICANN's efforts as well.

This is not to say that there is no room for entities who play a
coordinating role; far from it.  Dictionaries, learned societies, usage
pundits, and all the rest have an equal claim to providing an
"authoritative" source of names - and we, the users of the English
language, get to decide which (if any) of them we want to obey.  It's
called unspoken consensus, and it works - indeed, no other system can
work as well.  ICANN can earn that consensus position by virtue of its
stewardship of the DNS; it cannot, and it must not, simply declare
itself to be playing that role and demand that we all follow its
dictates.

    2.  From the Summary:  "Put simply, deploying multiple public DNS roots
would raise a very strong possibility that users of different ISPs who
click on the same link on a web page could end up at different
destinations, against the will of the web page designers."

         "Against the will of the web page designers"?  Since when is that the
criterion of effective DNS performance?  Let me repeat:  I can call the
machine I'm working on a tomato.  It is my will that everyone on the
planet do so as well.  It would be nice, I suppose, if I could impose
my will on others, but I can't, and I shouldn't be able to.

    3.  From Section 5 ("Experimentation"):  "DNS experiments should be
encouraged. Experiments, however, almost by definition have certain
characteristics to avoid harm: (a) they are clearly labeled as
experiments, (b) it is well understood that these experiments may end
without establishing any prior claims on future directions, (c) they
are appropriately coordinated within a community-based framework (such
as the IETF), and (d) the experimenters commit to adapt to consensus-
based standards when they emerge through the ICANN and other community-
based processes."

         Well.  Consensus is a nice word.  The notion that ICANN's process are
consensus-based is a bit much, don't you think?  By all means, DNS
"experiments" should be subject to consensus-based processes - as they
will be if ICANN leaves them alone, for no DNS experiment can "succeed"
unless somehow the hundreds of thousands of Internet Service Providers
out there agree to resolve names in the manner proposed.   As we used
to say in Brooklyn, that's the beauty part; it is inherent in the nature
of language that it requires consensus to be effective.

- --
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, 01 Jun 2001 11:18:30 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: [ga-icann] ICANN...Stuart Lynn Explains Himself

Bruce and all,

  I believe the exact URL is as follows:
http://www.icannwatch.com/article.php?sid=187&mode=thread&order=0
But thank you for pointing this out to everyone!  >;)

  I read Stewart's comments with some interest.  I can only wonder if
he is subscribed to this list or the DNSO ga-roots list?  Stewart?

  Stewart made reference to http://www.dnspolicy.com/ in one of his
responses.  As I recall at one time that site was a site used to
personally attack myself and as a news site for DNS issues
or other ICNN related articles.  Now that WXW has redesigned
this web site, the information is much different form it's original
intention.  However I posted a response to WXW's announcement
of this site to the DNSO GA list regarding some missing references,
namely the list archives of [email-masked] (Recently
defunct) for other lengthy discussions on other root structures.
I wonder if Stewart had read any of those archives before they
were taken down?  Stewart?  I wonder if Stewart is aware that
Competitive and Inclusive root structures as well as Registries
have been around for a number of years?  Stewart?  From his
responses and comments on this article it seems that he doesn't
and has not done his homework very well....  Please do it
Stewart!

Bruce James wrote:

> Stuart Lynn Explains Himself
>
>  http://www.icannwatch.com/
>
> /Bruce
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-icann" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
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: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 18:18:01 -0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] root vs roots - the false but usefull confusion

Sotiris,

>
>"William S. Lovell" wrote:
>
> > Why isn't all this, and others like it, in ga-roots?
>
>Perhaps because there's no cross-posting.
>

Can you please elaborate on this?
You argue that this is posted on GA instead of GA-roots (where it belongs) 
because there is no cross-posting.
Where would it have been *with* cross-posting?

Thanks
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 18:25:47 -0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [ga] ICANN to address alternative domains

William,

>
>With all due respect, that is for the list participants to decide.
>
>Just because a list exists that this is on topic for, it does NOT make
>that topic verboten on this list.
>

Whether it is verboten or not it depends on the rules.
Wheter it is posted in the appropriate list or not depends on the 
participant, his/her purpose, his/her politeness and/or respect for the 
others (ultimately, his/her QI may play a role).

Personally I do believe that, if there's an appropriate forum prepared for 
the purpose, the post should be considered "out of scope" in other fora, but 
this is of course only my personal opinion.

What I would ask, for the future, to the people that cannot avoid misposting 
stuff to at least show this in the subject line.
If somebody *does not* subscribe, for instance, to ga-root, is because 
he/she is *not interested* in ga-root stuff: please marke the subject line 
[ga-root], so that he/she can set the filtering appropriately.

Thanks, and best regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 12:34:21 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[4]: [ga] ICANN to address alternative domains

Hello Roberto,

Friday, June 01, 2001, 11:25:47 AM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> William,

>>
>>With all due respect, that is for the list participants to decide.
>>
>>Just because a list exists that this is on topic for, it does NOT make
>>that topic verboten on this list.
>>

> Whether it is verboten or not it depends on the rules.
> Wheter it is posted in the appropriate list or not depends on the 
> participant, his/her purpose, his/her politeness and/or respect for the 
> others (ultimately, his/her QI may play a role).

> Personally I do believe that, if there's an appropriate forum prepared for 
> the purpose, the post should be considered "out of scope" in other fora, but 
> this is of course only my personal opinion.

Perhaps it should be considered "out of scope" as far as the other
"Special lists" are concerned.  But for the main GA list, I can't see
how it can possible be considered out of scope.

After all, ANY conclusions or motions or actions that come out of
these special groups would have to be brought to the main GA list and
discussed and voted on before it could be considered workproduct of
the GA.

The GA list IS the general assembly.  And that makes any issue in
front of the GA appropriate for that main list.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh
mailto:[email-masked]
Owner, Userfriendly.com
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net

- --
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, 01 Jun 2001 19:11:51 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] ccTLDs to Leave DNSO?

ccTLDs to Leave DNSO?

 http://www.lextext.com/icann/index.html

/Bruce

- --
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, 01 Jun 2001 19:16:58 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Status Report of the Internationalized Domain Names Internal Working Group of the ICANN Board of Directors

Status Report of the Internationalized Domain Names Internal Working Group
of the ICANN Board of Directors:

 http://www.icann.org/stockholm/idn-topic.htm

/Bruce

- --
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, 01 Jun 2001 19:21:56 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] ICANN Sees Revolt On Domain Sovereignty

ICANN Sees Revolt On Domain Sovereignty:

 http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,4164,2767690,00.html

/Bruce

- --
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, 01 Jun 2001 22:25:34 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: [ga-icann] ICANN policy on record keeping

Joanna and all,

Joanna Lane wrote:

> Whereas the ICANN archive at
> http://www.icann.org/stockholm/unique-root-draft.htm comprises three
> distinct elements, each posted on a different day, but noted as posted
> together on 28 May 2001:-
>
> 1) Discussion Draft: A Unique, Authoratitive Root for the DNS, posted 28 May
> 2001.
>
> 2) Note to the ICANN Community by Stuart Lynn, posted 29 May 2001.
>
> 3) Public Comment Forum, posted 1 June 2001 (?)
>
> Whereas between May 28 2001 and June 1 2001, many comments about item
> numbered 1 above were posted by members of the ICANN community to various
> official DNSO mailing lists, also published by other media in the public
> domain.
>
> It is therefore apparent that the historical context in which some comments
> are made by the community cannot be relied upon.

  Indeed this is true.  As we have seen lately from VRSN/NSOL and now
Stewart Lynn.

>
>
> For the purposes of historical accuracy, and the avoidance of doubt that
> ICANN may tamper retrospectively with substantive documents in its own
> archive, I call upon members of the GA to urge ICANN to note all updates as
> and when they are made to specific URLs for all to see.

  This has recently happened with the VRSN/NSOL Domain-Policy archives.
It has also occurred with [email-masked] some time ago as well as
the
gTLD-MoU Mailing list archives as well...  Hence from the beginning of
this
and all other DNSO Mailing lists, I have been keeping an archive as well
as an archive of all Admin and other private E-Mails from known
DNSO participants and NC members.  I have an internal Database
for these ML's with a very nice search facility as well...

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

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
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: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 21:30:43 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [ga-icann] ICANN policy on record keeping

Mr. Williams,

Those archives are hereby claimed in the name of ICANN.  Along with dotBIZ and
dotBZ we claim all these these things in the name of the Great and Powerful BoD.
And by the way we hereby give authority to our agent Verisign to take full control
of such property on our behalf.

Should you not acquiesce immediately we shall order Apnic and Ripe and Arin to
disconnect any connectivity you may have or may be associated with, including
Michael Powells mom and seven year old son.

Through an arrangement reached between Registrar.com and the TLDA (somehow linked
through the 2 GA chair types) you have been further asked never to post to this
list again, because you have been permanently banned for mean and vicious
comments.
********

Yes I agree pretty stupid, and pretty outlandish. But are they stupid and
outlandish because of content or because the speakers would never admit to such
truth.

Sincerely,

Jeff Williams wrote:

> Joanna and all,
>
> Joanna Lane wrote:
>
> > Whereas the ICANN archive at
> > http://www.icann.org/stockholm/unique-root-draft.htm comprises three
> > distinct elements, each posted on a different day, but noted as posted
> > together on 28 May 2001:-
> >
> > 1) Discussion Draft: A Unique, Authoratitive Root for the DNS, posted 28 May
> > 2001.
> >
> > 2) Note to the ICANN Community by Stuart Lynn, posted 29 May 2001.
> >
> > 3) Public Comment Forum, posted 1 June 2001 (?)
> >
> > Whereas between May 28 2001 and June 1 2001, many comments about item
> > numbered 1 above were posted by members of the ICANN community to various
> > official DNSO mailing lists, also published by other media in the public
> > domain.
> >
> > It is therefore apparent that the historical context in which some comments
> > are made by the community cannot be relied upon.
>
>   Indeed this is true.  As we have seen lately from VRSN/NSOL and now
> Stewart Lynn.
>
> >
> >
> > For the purposes of historical accuracy, and the avoidance of doubt that
> > ICANN may tamper retrospectively with substantive documents in its own
> > archive, I call upon members of the GA to urge ICANN to note all updates as
> > and when they are made to specific URLs for all to see.
>
>   This has recently happened with the VRSN/NSOL Domain-Policy archives.
> It has also occurred with [email-masked] some time ago as well as
> the
> gTLD-MoU Mailing list archives as well...  Hence from the beginning of
> this
> and all other DNSO Mailing lists, I have been keeping an archive as well
> as an archive of all Admin and other private E-Mails from known
> DNSO participants and NC members.  I have an internal Database
> for these ML's with a very nice search facility as well...
>
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Joanna Lane
> > http://www.internetstakeholders.com
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-icann" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail [email-masked]
> Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> 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-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, 01 Jun 2001 23:45:57 -0700
From: "Bret A. Fausett" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] webcast of GA ??

I seem unable to reach the page for the GA webcast:

   http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/

Has anyone else been able to get in? (message sent at 8:45 am Stockholm
time, 11:45 pm Los Angeles time).

     -- Bret

- --
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, 02 Jun 2001 02:45:00 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] GA Meeting in Stockholm - no webcast or remote participation

The URL provided for the webcast and remote participation has no data at the
time of posting.

Regards,
Joanna

- ----------
From: DNSO Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 09:35:51 +0200 (MET DST)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [announce] GA Meeting in Stockholm, 2 June 2001, agenda

[ To: [email-masked], [email-masked] ]
[ To: [email-masked] ]

[ cf. http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010602.GAstockholm-agenda.html ]

ICANN/DNSO

      DNSO General Assembly Stockholm Meeting on 2 June 2001 - agenda

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

27 May 2001

From Danny Younger, GA Chair

Date, time and webcast

  1. The DNSO General Assembly meeting in Stockholm, Sweden, will be held on
     Saturday, 2 June 2001, 08:30 - 13:00, [@ Room K2].

     [ 23:30 LA former day, 2:30 New York, 6:30 UTC, 15:30 Japan/Korea,
     16:30 Melbourne ]
     [ For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/ ]

     Please visit http://www.icann.org/stockholm/ for details about all
     ICANN meetings (schedule, agendas, meeting rooms, hotels, visas, etc).

  2. The GA will be webcast by Berkman Center, thanks to Ben Edelman
     [email-masked]

     Access will be via http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/ as
     usual. You will find on Berkman site all information about technical
     requirements.

     In summary a 28.8 Kbps connection is required for access to live and
     archived streaming media feeds (56K or faster preferred). The necessary
     software is the RealPlayer version 5.0 or later (version G2 or later
     preferred) or the Microsoft Windows Media Player (version 6.4 or
     later).

Agenda

  1. 08:30 Opening:

        o 08:30 Report from the Chair
        o 08:40 Report from Secretariat
        o 08:50 Report from List Monitor Committee
        o 08:55 Feedback from the Interim Coordinating Committee of the
          At-Large Membership

  2. 09:00 Feedback from Constituency Meetings

        o ccTLD
        o Commercial
        o gTLD
        o ISP
        o Non-commercial
        o Registrars
        o Trademark

  3. 09:30 Discussion with Constituencies: Resolution 01.28 -- Restructuring
     the DNSO

     See http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-13mar01.htm:

          [Resolution 01.28] The Board asks the Names Council and other
          sources to separate their proposals into those that improve
          operations of the DNSO as it is constituted today and those which
          may result in changes in the structure of the DNSO and/or major
          changes in its functioning.

  4. 10:00 Research Report: Alternate Roots Briefing Paper

  5. 10:10 Open Forum

  6. 10:40 Intermission

  7. 11:00 Open Forum

  8. 12:15 Guest Speakers: Esther Dyson & David Johnson

  9. 12:45 Results of the General Assembly Ballots:

        o Individuals' Constituency
        o Funding the DNSO and other Supporting Organizations

     See
     
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.GA-2motions-IndConstituency-DNSOfund-vot
e.html 

 10. 12:50 Closing remarks from the Chair

 11. 13:00 End of General Assembly plenary session

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

                    Information from:  © DNSO GA Chair's

- --
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, 2 Jun 2001 03:32:01 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] GA Meeting in Stockholm - no webcast or remote participation

It's up now

On 2 Jun 2001, at 2:45, Joanna Lane wrote:

> The URL provided for the webcast and remote participation has no data at
> the time of posting.
> 
> Regards,
> Joanna
> 
> 
> ----------
> From: DNSO Secretariat <[email-masked]>
> Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 09:35:51 +0200 (MET DST)
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [announce] GA Meeting in Stockholm, 2 June 2001, agenda
> 
> 
> [ To: [email-masked], [email-masked] ]
> [ To: [email-masked] ]
> 
> [ cf. http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010602.GAstockholm-agenda.html ]
> 
> 
> ICANN/DNSO
> 
>       DNSO General Assembly Stockholm Meeting on 2 June 2001 - agenda
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 27 May 2001
> 
> >From Danny Younger, GA Chair
> 
> Date, time and webcast
> 
>   1. The DNSO General Assembly meeting in Stockholm, Sweden, will be held
>   on
>      Saturday, 2 June 2001, 08:30 - 13:00, [@ Room K2].
> 
>      [ 23:30 LA former day, 2:30 New York, 6:30 UTC, 15:30 Japan/Korea,
>      16:30 Melbourne ] [ For other places see
>      http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/ ]
> 
>      Please visit http://www.icann.org/stockholm/ for details about all
>      ICANN meetings (schedule, agendas, meeting rooms, hotels, visas, etc).
> 
>   2. The GA will be webcast by Berkman Center, thanks to Ben Edelman
>      [email-masked]
> 
>      Access will be via http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/ as
>      usual. You will find on Berkman site all information about technical
>      requirements.
> 
>      In summary a 28.8 Kbps connection is required for access to live and
>      archived streaming media feeds (56K or faster preferred). The
>      necessary software is the RealPlayer version 5.0 or later (version G2
>      or later preferred) or the Microsoft Windows Media Player (version 6.4
>      or later).
> 
> Agenda
> 
>   1. 08:30 Opening:
> 
>         o 08:30 Report from the Chair
>         o 08:40 Report from Secretariat
>         o 08:50 Report from List Monitor Committee
>         o 08:55 Feedback from the Interim Coordinating Committee of the
>           At-Large Membership
> 
>   2. 09:00 Feedback from Constituency Meetings
> 
>         o ccTLD
>         o Commercial
>         o gTLD
>         o ISP
>         o Non-commercial
>         o Registrars
>         o Trademark
> 
>   3. 09:30 Discussion with Constituencies: Resolution 01.28 --
>   Restructuring
>      the DNSO
> 
>      See http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-13mar01.htm:
> 
>           [Resolution 01.28] The Board asks the Names Council and other
>           sources to separate their proposals into those that improve
>           operations of the DNSO as it is constituted today and those which
>           may result in changes in the structure of the DNSO and/or major
>           changes in its functioning.
> 
>   4. 10:00 Research Report: Alternate Roots Briefing Paper
> 
>   5. 10:10 Open Forum
> 
>   6. 10:40 Intermission
> 
>   7. 11:00 Open Forum
> 
>   8. 12:15 Guest Speakers: Esther Dyson & David Johnson
> 
>   9. 12:45 Results of the General Assembly Ballots:
> 
>         o Individuals' Constituency
>         o Funding the DNSO and other Supporting Organizations
> 
>      See
> 
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2001.GA-2motions-IndConstituency-DNSOfund-vo
> t e.html 
> 
>  10. 12:50 Closing remarks from the Chair
> 
>  11. 13:00 End of General Assembly plenary session
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>                     Information from:  © DNSO GA Chair's
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #507
************************