[ncdnhc-discuss] Re: Decentalization proposal for ICANN Evolution and Reform

[Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law]

I think some clear design for what to do in the face of collisions, and
indeed delegations that tend to reduce the chance of collisions, will
reduce the size of this set to something quite small.

At that point, one has the problems we currently have, granted, but one
could design to make it a (vanishingly) small set.


On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, vint cerf wrote:

> Jamie,
> 
> my guess is that we don't need to go quite that far to deal with ICANN 
> challenges. If there are ever conflicts among numbering, protocol, and
> naming structures, it may be better to have a common forum in which to
> deal with them rather than having some major inter-organizational 
> debate as to how to deal with it. While distribution is attractive in
> many circumstances, it introduces the potential for combinatorial 
> explosions in terms of interactions and coordination. 
> 
> Could you give some further thought to side effects of the proposal 
> below along those lines?
> 
> vint
> 
> At 05:54 AM 4/4/2002 -0500, James Love wrote:
> >This is a specific proposal for ICANN decentralization.
> >
> >1.   Get ICANN out of the protoccal and numbering business, and focus on the
> >names issues, where the lack of an accepted decision making structure is the
> >most problematic.  Let the ASO and PSO be independent and sort our their own
> >issues.
> >
> >2.    Begin with an ICANN/DNSO, I'll call ICANN-1, that is particularly US
> >Centric, and according to observors, tends to do, for better or worse, the
> >following things.
> >
> >     a.   Embraces US type instincts on free expression and libertarian type
> >values.
> >     b.  Embraces US style approaches to protection of consumers and in
> >areas where it has a responsibility, trademark issues.
> >     c.  Tends to favor (sometimes)  firms that give money to US politicians
> >or promises jobs to former US government officials (is influenced by the
> >particular US styles of corruption).
> >
> >3.   Allow new regional ICANN spinoffs to be created, under the "go forth
> >and multiply" theory, which is to say, regions can self organize, and
> >approach ICANN-1, be come recognized as a member of the ICANN family.
> >
> >4.    Once a new region can satisfy ICANN-1 that it is a stable
> >organization, and that it can trusted to coordinate the uniqueness issue for
> >TLDs,   it then becomes ICANN-2, and can approve as many new TLDs as it
> >wishes, and impose whatever controls on those TLDs as it wishes, subject
> >only to whatever procedures exist for coordination of uniqueness of names.
> >This procedure continues until you have a sufficient number of new regional
> >groups that do what those regions want done.
> >
> >    Jamie
> >
> >--------------------
> >James Love, mailto:james.love at cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org
> >voice +1.202.387.8030, mobile +1.202.361.3040, fax +1.202.234.5176
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 

-- 
		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 hot here.<--