[ncdnhc-discuss] Decentalization proposal for ICANN Evolution and Reform
Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law
froomkin at law.miami.edu
Tue Apr 9 04:31:35 CEST 2002
[non-list cc's removed; either they read lists and don't need duplicates,
or they are not team players and are part of the problem]
Exactly. With all those secret Board meetings, All the fixed resolutions
that turn up a the last minute, all the manipulation, there is now no
trust.
There was a lot of trust three years ago. Despite its dodgy secretive
origins it had a star-studded cast, and I certainly told all my friends to
give ICANN a chance. OK, I got suspicious after a year, and radicalized
at the Board Squatter moment (year two), maybe I was early by some
standards....but it's all played out now.
It is evident that all that matters in ICANN is votes. The DNSO changes
the rules to re-elect its chair to keep business control. The Board
refuses to have a a majority the dominant faction cannot control, thus no
9 directly elected (or at all elected) outsiders from the club. A faction
has control, and it refuses to consider any rule set that has any chance
of displacing that faction. Until and unless they do, no sale.
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Esther Dyson wrote:
> As someone once asked me, "Why can't we just all agree to sit together in a
> room and figure this out, without a lot of fuss?"
>
> That room is called ICANN.
>
> But a lot of people now care what goes on in that room, and they will not
> go away until they feel secure about what happens in the room. THen they
> will get bored and leave it alone....
>
> Esther
>
> At 05:34 PM 4/4/2002, Alejandro Pisanty - DGSCA y FQ, UNAM wrote:
> >Dear Dave,
> >
> >in following the thread about decentralization, the question that remains
> >for me is: if you decentralized (eg making address, protocol, and names
> >issues separate, or controlling TLDs regionally), what would be the nature
> >of the agency or body that kept things coordinated?
> >
> >One guess: international, private-sector or private-public partnership,
> >bottom-up, consensus-based... Heard it before?
> >
> >Personally I remain open to the idea of decentralization (as you say, it
> >is an appealing word), and even more open to carrying the idea through
> >consequently to see if and how it is really viable).
> >
> >Yours,
> >
> >Alx
> >
> >
> >. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> >Director General de Servicios de Computo Academico
> >UNAM, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
> >Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
> >Tel. (+52-55) 5622-8541, 5622-8542 Fax 5550-8405
> >http://www.dgsca.unam.mx
> >*
> >** 10 Aniversario de Internet Society - www.inet2002.org en Washington, DC
> >---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, www.isoc.org
> > Participa en ICANN, www.icann.org
> >. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> >
> >
> >
> >On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Dave Crocker wrote:
> >
> > > At 05:54 AM 4/4/2002 -0500, James Love wrote:
> > > >This is a specific proposal for ICANN decentralization.
> > >
> > > Given a goal of decentralization, Jamie's proposal does not go far
> > > enough. Any effort at decentralization needs to be more complete.
> > >
> > > There are two assumptions behind Jamie's proposal:
> > >
> > > a) it is better to have more localized control of TLDs, and
> > >
> > > b) coordination among multiple TLD-granting organizations is easy.
> > >
> > > However a regional body has the difficulty of needing to obtain agreements
> > > among the member countries each of which has its own culture and its own
> > > sovereignty. The idea of requiring a single set of rules for Japan,
> > > Myanmar and India, for example, strikes me as no easier than having a
> > > single set of TLD-allocation rules for the entire world, as we have with
> > > ICANN.
> > >
> > > Consequently, I suggest that we have one TLD-granting organization for each
> > > country. Each organization will apply whatever policies they wish, from
> > > the perspective of their country.
> > >
> > > This leaves the trivial task of coordinating uniqueness among the
> > > TLD-granting organizations.
> > >
> > > Only two questions are unanswered:
> > >
> > > 1. What is the actual benefit of such decentralization? Although
> > > decentralization is an appealing concept, it is not clear what specific
> > > benefits are expected in this case. It is even less clear what specific
> > > benefits are likely. Perhaps there are examples of global decentralization
> > > for such an operation? That way we could understand the benefits and the
> > > difficulties.
> > >
> > > 2. Will coordination of uniqueness actually be that trivial? For example,
> > > what will prevent a TLD land-grab by the different granting agencies,
> > > instantly adding thousands -- or even millions -- of TLDs to the root.
> > > Although some DNS technicians believe that millions of new TLDs in the root
> > > will not cause a problem, others believe it will. And what about disputes
> > > between the different granting agencies?
> > >
> > > d/
> > >
> > > ----------
> > > Dave Crocker <mailto:dave at tribalwise.com>
> > > TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
> > > tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Discuss mailing list
> > > Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> > > http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > >
>
>
>
> Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
> chairman, EDventure Holdings
> writer, Release 3.0 (on Website below)
> edyson at edventure.com
> 1 (212) 924-8800 -- fax 1 (212) 924-0240
> 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> New York, NY 10011 USA
> http://www.edventure.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.<--
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list