[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IFWP] catch 22? - Not hardly
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org, ICANN Comments <Comments@icann.org>
- Subject: Re: [IFWP] catch 22? - Not hardly
- From: Jeff Williams <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 23:59:17 +0100
- Organization: INEG. Inc. (Spokesman INEGroup)
- References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990812011416.1813Bfirstname.lastname@example.org>
Planet Communications Computing Facility wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, Gordon Cook wrote:
> > if the internet is to be homogenized or globalized under uniform laws
> > and controls, let it be done openly and honestly and NOT under the
> > guise of setting up ICANN to bring competition into dns and protect
> > us from evil NSI...... although I must say i have become almost as
> > disgusted with the absence of apparent leadership from Jim Rutt at
> > NSI as with Esther and Mike.
> Let me assure you that under no circumstances will the internet be
> globalized under uniform laws and controls. DNS is a technical matter
> wrapped in a catch 22. Governments are attempting to sieze an opportunity
> at control which does not exist. I'm very concerned that alot of people
> are going to end up with egg on their faces and we should take every
> opportunity to avoid that.
> Neither ICANN nor NSI is evil. We both understand that. Nor are the
> government officials involved in this mess evil. Possibly misguided.
In the case of the NTIA, you maybe correct. But they have had plenty
of evidence and input to extricate themselves for over 4 years, from
any form of misguided behavior. As for NSI, they are still in the learning
stages in many ways, but are vastly more practiced than is the ICANN
(Initial?) Interim board. Now, for ICANN, they have had the opportunity
of the benefit of many whom have been involved in these debates and
discussions for long enough, yet they continue to ignore any point of
view or suggestion that is not of their own origination. Does this make them
Evil? No. Does it make them incompetent? I think it does. Others
mileage may vary of course.
> The only thing we have discovered in our examination of this process is
> that no one is in control. And those in control of portions of the dns
> infrastructure are themselves divided.
To some degree, and in varying degrees, this is true.
> Jim, Esther, Mike and the remainder of the gang will not use whatever
> control they do have because the reprocussions would be fatal.
I believe you mean Joe, Esther, and Mike here. But none the less, here
I don't agree. They have already tried and are to some extent have used
their influence to force policies upon the stakeholders that are not
supported by them. The "Accreditation Policy" for instance, is just one example.
> makes the first move will by default be thrown off the party boat and lose
> whatever control they did have. If this were to ever happen internet
> users would receive a quick education and they would be fried alive and
> this process forever lost.
This sounds good, or safe, but is not realistic.
> At this time control of the internet is distributed to 150,000 entities
> who control the root pointers. I think it's time to ask them what they
They have been ask, and several times... Where have you been?
> But before we do that, the quality of the discussion in these conferences
> must improve. ICANN's survival depends on it.
ICANN's survival, in it's present form is questionable at best...
> Jeff Mason
> Planet Communication & Computing Facility email@example.com
> Public Access Internet Research Publisher 1 (212) 894-3704 ext. 1033
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.
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208