[ncdnhc-discuss] ICANN GA to vote on 2 motions, one for DoC rebid of ICANN Contracts
James Love
james.love at cptech.org
Wed May 15 16:30:56 CEST 2002
I plan to vote *for* both motions, which are fairly similiar. I have a brief
analysis of the two texts following the GA announcement of the vote.
Jamie
[ga at dnso.org
[voters at dnso.org]
ICANN/DNSO
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DNSO General Assembly
Basic outline of the voting process
b12, Two motions about ICANN Reform
14 May 2002
BASIC OUTLINE OF THE VOTING PROCESS, b12, Two motions about ICANN Reform
1. A ballot is prepared.
A ballot starts with line "BEGIN" and ends with line "END__".
It is like this:
BEGIN:b12:KabcdZ:FirstName_LastName:email at address.somewhere:SVP-reply
b12:KabcdZ:[ ] I vote FOR Motion 1 ("Request to US DoC")
b12:KabcdZ:[ ] I vote AGAINST Motion 1
b12:KabcdZ:[ ] I ABSTAIN regarding Motion 1
b12:KabcdZ:[ ] I vote FOR Motion 2 ("Reform principles")
b12:KabcdZ:[ ] I vote AGAINST Motion 2
b12:KabcdZ:[ ] I ABSTAIN regarding Motion 2
END__:b12:KabcdZ:FirstName_LastName:email at address.somewhere:SVP-reply
Motion 1. "Request that US DoC hold open competition
for services now offered by ICANN"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WHEREAS the Internet Corporation for Assigned names and Numbers (ICANN) has
dramatically changed the initial terms of reference for ICANN, and is
proposing even further changes.
WHEREAS these proposed changes have met extensive opposition in the Internet
community and go even further from the original terms of reference.
WHEREAS a new open competition would allow the U.S. Department of Commerce
(the DoC) to consider both the ICANN Board proposal for restructuring, and
alternatives offered by others for managing key Internet resources, while
providing for a public record of the process for enhanced visibility.
WHEREAS the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain name Supporting Organization
(the DNSO) also reminds the DoC, that in the Green and the White Paper, the
Government of the United States made it clear that it intends to withdraw
from management of the Domain name System (the DNS).
It is hereby RESOLVED that:-
The General Assembly of the Domain name Supporting Organization of Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) asks the US Department of
Commerce to have an open competition for the services now provided by ICANN,
provided that the new competition would address the need to develop an
international framework for DNS management. An open competition should aim
to achieve comprehensive privatization and internationalization of DNS
services, consistent with the need for stability, but also innovation,
competition and freedom.
Motion 2. "Basic principles for the ICANN Reform Process"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whereas there are certain basic principles which have to be honored
by an entity coordinating key Internet resources in order to
gain the trust of the Internet community,
Whereas these principles include transparent process, broad input into
policy-making, which must include meaningful individual
and non-commercial participation, and accountability (including
independent review of decisions),
Whereas there is a widespread perception that ICANN is moving away
from these principles, in particular by stalling or abandoning
processes for the implementation of an independent review
system and for participation of the Internet community at
large in ICANN oversight,
the General Assembly of the DNSO reminds the ICANN Board that it must
adhere to these principles in any reform proposal and make it
sufficiently known how proposed reforms provide improvements regarding
these principles. Should the ICANN reform process fail to provide
significant improvements in these regards, it is the international
Internet community's and governments' task to consider how all of or
parts of ICANN's responsibilities could be transferred smoothly to one
or more new or existing organizations which are accountable to the
international Internet community as a whole, have clearly defined
missions and are not only under the sole control of a national
department of commerce, without endangering the stability of the DNS
or the Internet as a whole. In the meantime, all groups of the Internet
community are called to deliver their input on reforms needed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The ballot is assigned a number (first field in a line), here "b12" --
ballot number 12 (it is the twelfth ballot submitted to the GA vote
since January 2000).
3. The ballot is personalised. Each line indicates who is voting.
4. The second field, here between "b12" and "FirstName_LastName", indicate
a personalised code given for this ballot to this person. A
personalised code is 6 characters, starting with "K", ending with "Z",
here "KabcdZ".
5. Do not edit the ballot. Just put an "X" between square brackets [ ] if
you give your vote to a statement written in a line.
You have two votes, no more. You can vote for or against both motions,
you can vote against one and for the other, you can abstain on either
or both.
6. The ballot will arrive From: "gavote at dnso.org" -- please reply without
CC to any list.
7. You will receive an acknowledgement of your ballot within 48 hours.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information from: ) DNSO GA's Chair
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
To: "General assembly list" <ga at dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 8:50 PM
Subject: Comparison of both texts
Looking at both motions, I can't see a good reason to vote
against either one. Of course I agree with the
Love/Lane/etc text, asking for the rebid ("new open
competition for services now provided by ICANN"), but the
"moderate" text by Alexander Svensson, while definitely
bland, is not objectionable either. In my mind there is
little virtue in offering a text that is "moderate",
"radical" or "conservative." I think the more important
issue is whether or not it expresses the right idea, the
thing that makes sense doing, or at least asking. Sometime
what is needed is moderate, sometimes radical, sometimes
conservative, and sometimes these labels mean next to
nothing. Here are a couple of comparisons in terms of tone
if not substance:
Love/Lane/Hofmann et al.
the Internet Corporation for Assigned names and Numbers
(ICANN) has dramatically changed the initial terms of
reference for ICANN, and is proposing even further
changes. . .. these proposed changes have met extensive
opposition in the Internet community.
Svensson
there are certain basic principles which have to be
honored by an entity coordinating key Internet
resources in order to gain the trust of the Internet
community . . . there is a widespread perception that
ICANN is moving away from these principles, in
particular by stalling or abandoning processes for the
implementation of an independent review system and for
participation of the Internet community at large in
ICANN oversight,
Love/Lane/Hofmann et al.
The General Assembly of the Domain name Supporting
Organization of Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers (ICANN) asks the US Department of Commerce
to have an open competition for the services now
provided by ICANN, provided that the new competition
would address the need to develop an international
framework for DNS management.
Svensson
General Assembly of the DNSO reminds the ICANN Board
that it must adhere to these principles in any reform
proposal and make it sufficiently known how proposed
reforms provide improvements regarding these
principles. Should the ICANN reform process fail to
provide significant improvements in these regards, it
is the international Internet community's and
governments' task to consider how all of or parts of
ICANN's responsibilities could be transferred smoothly
to one or more new or existing organizations
Love/Lane/Hofmann et al.
An open competition should aim to achieve comprehensive
privatization and internationalization of DNS services,
consistent with the need for stability, but also
innovation, competition and freedom.
Svensson
have clearly defined missions and are not only under
the sole control of a national department of commerce,
without endangering the stability of the DNS or the
Internet as a whole.
--------------------------------
James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org
http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
--------------------------------
James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org
http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list