[ncdnhc-discuss] A statement on the ICANN "reform" proposal

[James Love]

Dave, just out of curiosity.  Have you ever found even *one* thing
recommended to or done by  the ICANN staff that you did not like?

Jamie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Crocker" <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>
To: "Rob Courtney" <rob at cdt.org>
Cc: "Rob Courtney" <rob at cdt.org>; "Milton Mueller" <Mueller at syr.edu>;
<discuss at icann-ncc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] A statement on the ICANN "reform" proposal


> At 12:04 PM 2/26/2002 -0500, Rob Courtney wrote:
> >At 8:17 AM -0800 2/26/02, Dave Crocker wrote:
> >>At 10:15 AM 2/26/2002 -0500, Rob Courtney wrote:
> >
> >but the degree and type of that influence is something that those who
> >design ICANN have control over.
>
> Thank you.  Nicely said.  It highlights exactly what is missing in these
> sorts of exchanges:
>
> ICANN is not a design exercise.  It is tasked with ensuring continued
> operation of critical functions in Internet administration and operation.
>
> Yes, one can make a design that has, or omits, anything one wants.
>
> One cannot, however, make a successful ICANN that has a design that
ignores
> that actual power of governments.
>
> Giving governments a purely advisory role will work only if the
governments
> are willing to accept that role.  Here we have been seeing that they are
not.
>
> Hence the goal is one of trying to find a balance that governments WILL
accept.
>
>
> >I think it is possible to describe, with clarity, every single one of the
> >things ICANN should be doing. As a strawman: ONLY those items for which
> >centralized control is NECESSARY to assure interoperability, data
> >integrity, the availability of the Whois, etc.
>
> If one worries only about the narrowest of protocol issues, you are
> probably correct.
>
> However ICANN must worry about ensuring that the name and number
> administration service actually works in this real world we all inhabit.
A
> working system must deal with more than a small set of protocol
> standards.  It must deal with its operation in a larger context.
>
> Absence of a UDRP, for example, was in fact proving crippling.  Hence the
> need for a mechanism that dealt with a core set of registration disputes.
>
> d/
>
> ----------
> Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> tel +1.408.246.8253;  (new)fax +1.408.850.1850
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>