[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Comment-Dnso] Re: [IFWP] RE: ISP Constituency DNSO
Jay and all,
Good questions and good points here Jay. It appears that the ICANN
has a particular desire to effect a specific outcome with regards to
their decision to structure "Constituencies" within the DNSO itself.
Of course there are obvious advantages that can be exercised should
such a bias be allowed. This of course would by design limit transparency,
and openness, which as we have seen throughout the process thus
far, is a strong desire of the current ICANN Interim Board and the GIP.
Jay Fenello wrote:
> Hello Esther,
>
> While your stated goals are admirable,
> they are not sufficient.
>
> As I've written to you before, the timing
> of the formation of these constituencies
> is critical.
>
> If only a handful get approved initially,
> then *they* will determine the policies
> for the entire DNSO via the Names Council.
>
> How will the ICANN Board address this
> potentially biased outcome.
>
> Jay.
>
> At 04:58 PM 5/9/99 , Esther Dyson wrote:
> >We understand your concerns. But as you say below, we are looking for
> >"sectorial self-regulation and organization." If it is lacking, we will take
> >what steps are necessary to ensure that each constituency is appropriately
> >open - or that there is am "opposite" constituency to balance it.
> >
> >Esther
> >
> >At 10:12 AM 07/05/99 +0200, Manuel Hurtado wrote:
> >>Dear Esther,
> >>
> >>What we meant is that the draft was not out for the public comment before May
> >>3rd. If it had been there and had been commented and negociated, as other
> >>drafts for other constituencies have been, the ISP community might have
> >>reached and agreement that is now very difficult. This attitude has palced
> >>us in a very difficult situation, as there is no time to present
> >>"competing" drafts, which we do not believe is a good solution either.
> >>
> >>I will try to attend the Berlin meeting, but I am against on-site
> >>negotiations, as they would exclude most of the ISP community. The ISP
> >>constituency should follow and open and transparent process similar to the
> >>one that has been followed by other constituencies. It is painfull to see
> >>that this proposal forces ICANN to be the one to decide, instead of allowing
> >>sectorial self-regulation and organization. If we have read the ICANN
> >>chapter correctly, ICANN can not accept a constituency that has not followed
> >>that process and that clearly does not represent the community is has been
> >>called to represent. ICANN should assure that and agreement is reached by
> >>the professional ISP community, not allowing capture by a handfull of
> >>organizations.
> >>
> >>Manuel Hurtado
> >>President
> >>ISP Commission
> >>ASIMELEC-www.asimelec.es
> >>-----Mensaje original-----
> >>De: Esther Dyson <edyson@edventure.com>
> >>Para: Manuel Hurtado <mhurtado@offcampus.es>
> >>CC: comment-dnso@icann.org <comment-dnso@icann.org>; discuss@dnso.org
> >><discuss@dnso.org>; msvh@icann.org <msvh@icann.org>; Joe Sims
> >><Joe_Sims@jonesday.com>; Mike Roberts <mmr@darwin.ptvy.ca.us>
> >>Fecha: jueves, 06 de mayo de 1999 16:47
> >>Asunto: Re: ISP Constituency DNSO
> >>
> >>
> >>You are certainly allowed to make public comments, and indeed you are doing
> >>so now. Thank you! We will post them for you. We hope you will send a
> >>representative to the meeting in Berlin, as well.
> >>
> >>Esther Dyson
> >>
> >>At 02:38 PM 06/05/99 +0200, Manuel Hurtado wrote:
> >>>Dear Directors nad Staff of ICANN,
> >>>
> >>>ASIMELEC is very sad to see that some ISP organizations, without further
> >>consultation, are trying to capture the ISP Constituency of the DNSO.
> >>>
> >>>ASIMELEC is a trade organisation that represents ISPīs that cover over 85%
> >>of Internet traffic in Spain, (85% of over 2,000,000 users). Nevertheless,
> >>we have not been consulted on the formation of the ISP Constituency, nor
>
> >>have been allowed to make public comments, nor to enter the group of funding
> >>organisation of the DNSO ISP Constituency, as not documents have been made
> >>public before this time. Please see the comments below to the proposed ISP
> >>Constituency.
> >>>
> >>>*The ISP proposal that has been presented has been secretly prepared by the
> >>organisations that have signed it, without solicitation of public comments,
> >>nor allowing any other organisation to join in.
> >>>
> >>>*They reserve the right to accept other organisations, on their own
> >>judgement.
> >>>
> >>>*The rules for acceoting individual ISPīs are unclear, (because of
> >>language), but we are afraid that they exclude small ISPīs. The "founding
> >>members" are the only judges of what is acceptable.
> >>>
> >>>*The "founding members" give themselves three months to accept candidates.
> >>This allows them time to hold elections to Names Council representatives
> >>before they have to accept anybody.
> >>>
> >>>*Their Chapter says that Associations will represent.................,
> >>making it very unclear who might become a NC representative.
> >>>
> >>>*We believe that this candidacy is not prepared to be accepted by ICANN as
> >>it is, and -as there is no time to present new ones- no candidacy for ISPīs
> >>should be accepted by ICANN at this meeting, as there is not enough time to
> >>carry on an open and trasparent process to create a chapter and a fair ISP
> >>Constituency. We prefer to have to have no ISP industry representation at
> >>this time, if this means assuring fair representation in the future.
> >>>
> >>>Manuel Hurtado
> >>>President
> >>>ISP Commission
> >>>ASIMELEC-www.asimelec.es
> >>>
> >>>
> >>><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> >>><HTML><HEAD>
> >>><META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
> >>http-equiv=Content-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0
> >>Transitional//EN">
> >>><META content="MSHTML 5.00.2014.210" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
> >>><BODY bgColor=#b8b8b8>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>Dear Directors nad Staff of ICANN,</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>ASIMELEC is very sad to see that some ISP organizations,
> >>>without further consultation, are trying to capture the ISP Constituency of
> >>the
> >>>DNSO.</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>ASIMELEC is a trade organisation that represents ISPīs
> >>that
> >>>cover over 85% of Internet traffic in Spain, (85% of over 2,000,000 users).
> >>>Nevertheless, we have not been consulted on the formation of the ISP
> >>>Constituency, nor have been allowed to make public comments, nor to enter
> >>the
> >>>group of funding organisation of the DNSO ISP Constituency, as not
> >>documents
> >>>have been made public before this time. Please see the comments below to
> >>the
> >>>proposed ISP Constituency.</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>*The ISP proposal that has been presented has been
> >>secretly
> >>>prepared by the organisations that have signed it, without solicitation of
> >>>public comments, nor allowing any other organisation to join
> >>in.</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>*They reserve the right to accept other organisations, on
> >>>their own judgement.</FONT></DIV>
>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>*The rules for acceoting individual ISPīs are unclear,
> >>>(because of language), but we are afraid that they exclude small ISPīs. The
> >>>"founding members" are the only judges of what is acceptable.</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>*The "founding members" give themselves three months to
> >>accept
> >>>candidates. This allows them time to hold elections to Names Council
> >>>representatives before they have to accept anybody.</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>*Their Chapter says that Associations will
> >>>represent................., making it very unclear who might become a NC
> >>>representative.</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>*We believe that this candidacy is not prepared to be
> >>accepted
> >>>by ICANN as it is, and -as there is no time to present new ones- no
> >>>candidacy for ISPīs should be accepted by ICANN at this meeting, as there
> >>is not
> >>>enough time to carry on an open and trasparent process to create a
> >>chapter
> >>>and a fair ISP Constituency. We prefer to have to have no ISP industry
> >>>representation at this time, if this means assuring fair representation in
> >>the
> >>>future.</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>Manuel Hurtado</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>President</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>ISP Commission</FONT></DIV>
> >>><DIV><FONT size=2>ASIMELEC-www.asimelec.es
> >>><DIV> </DIV>
> >>><DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
> >>chairman, EDventure Holdings
> >>interim chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
> >>edyson@edventure.com
> >>1 (212) 924-8800
> >>1 (212) 924-0240 fax
> >>104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> >>New York, NY 10011 USA
> >>http://www.edventure.com http://www.icann.org
> >>
> >>High-Tech Forum in Europe: 24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
> >>PC Forum: March 2000, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
> >>Book: "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
> >chairman, EDventure Holdings
> >interim chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
> >edyson@edventure.com
> >1 (212) 924-8800
> >1 (212) 924-0240 fax
> >104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> >New York, NY 10011 USA
> >http://www.edventure.com http://www.icann.org
> >
> >High-Tech Forum in Europe: 24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
> >PC Forum: March 2000, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
> >Book: "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"
> >
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Jay Fenello
> President, Iperdome, Inc. 404-943-0524
> -----------------------------------------------
> What's your .per(sm)? http://www.iperdome.com
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208