[ncdnhc-discuss] GAC Transparency

[J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin]

Dear Jamie, Joop and James,
I am afraid you are totally wrong about the reasons for secrecy at GAC and 
BoD. The US NSA gave the explanation when requested by G.W.Bush to look at 
the DNS. Them too had secret meetings.

But one of these scientists technically explained why: when you do not know 
what you talk about you can do two things:
- either discuss in secret so you may pretend that the wrong decisions are 
the responsibility of the others,
- or have someone coming and explaining you first what you are talking about.

Now the ICANN made a step ahead. They asked Kent Crispin to join them to 
get some competence over the DNS, with the positive results we all know. 
So, the next step is simple: to get G.W.Bush to design Kent as the US 
Embassador for DNS Affairs, so the GAC gets some expertise.

When you think that 40 Embassadors went to Camberra, I suppose with an 
average of one assistant each. So 80 people travel and meeting expenses. To 
discuss the management of 13 micros delivering all the day long the 659 
addresses of 262 TLDs listed in a 70.984 bytes file (15.624 bytes zipped) 
with 60% of the responded calls being "error typo" ...

If that non backed-up prime military/terrorist 13 micros target had not 
been made the basis of the developped world just to permit the 
"stakeholders" to go under a little bit latter .... it would be real fun.
jfc

PS. If you consider a low average cost of $ 4500 salary and T&L per meeting 
participant (some fly 1st class, Camberra is not the center of the AirLine 
World and no previous reservations) plus room, secretariat, etc. the 
Cambera Meeting probably costed $ 380.000, ie $ 5.35 per root/byte ($ 24.32 
per zipped root/byte) or $ 29,230.77 per root server machine (offered for 
free by voluntary effort). Anyone with a more precise evaluation is 
welcome. I note that 550.000.000 people in the world have access to the 
Internet and 1.500.000.000 have no access to drinkable water (96,006 people 
per zipped root/byte).





On 14:11 13/06/02, James Love said:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Joop Teernstra" <terastra at terabytz.co.nz>
>: >Is there any known reason why the GAC has almost zero transparency?
>:
>: Relations between governments can be sensitive.
>: Diplomacy and transparency are to an extent mutually exclusive.
>
>      Well, this isn't true, IMO.   There is a huge push globally to make
>trade negotiations more transparent, in the WTO, WIPO, WHO, the Hague
>Conference, ITU, everywhere.  There is still plenty of room for diplomacy.
>People avoid transparency to avoid accountability.    The GAC is now chaired
>by a non government persons who apparently is in business with Ira
>Magaziner.  They have all of these secret discussions.  The didn't even put
>the last meeting on their web page:
>http://www.noie.gov.au/projects/international/DNS/gac/meetings/index.htm .
>The papers presented are secret.   Many of the GAC members probably want
>secrecy to avoid accountability at home, not for diplomacy, which they can
>do in lots of ways, such as through embassies, in information discussions,
>etc.
>
>    Jamie
>
>--------------------------------
>James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org
>http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at icann-ncc.org
>http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release Date: 05/06/02