[ncdnhc-discuss] No new LA agenda

[Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law]

FWIW, please count me as one who believes:

1. Security is an issue worth discussing.  The first step should be either
to commission a paper from an expert or 3, and/or to form a working group
to discuss the issue.  We need facts as to what people think the
correctable vulnerabilities are, other than ICANN's continuing failure to
provide the registrant/registrar data escrow that would probably be the
cornerstone of a good security policy.

2. It's ok to set aside some time for this issue in LA, but hijacking the
agenda is a very serious error.

3. It is appropriate for our leaders to complain that they and we were not
consulted, and therefore there is no documented consensus in this group to
support this high-handed, almost panic-driven, action.

4. It is appropriate for members of this constituency to discuss what view
if any we collectively hold, in the hopes of forming a consensus.  In the
absence of one, however, items can go onto the agenda at the staff's
behest, but it is wrong for them to take off major items.


 -- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin at law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                 -->It's very hot and humid here.<--