[] TAS Interruption - Update (17 April 2012)

Thu Apr 19 20:17:39 CEST 2012

Mary, I would favor an NCSG request for more detailed info and also a joint
Cy Chairs' request. Does anyone know if there is Constituency Chairs
email-list?

Alain

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:46 AM, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:

>  I agree with Avri. Hyperbole and accusations aside, this is something
> that justifies a request for more detailed information rather than just
> general updates.
>
>  My suggestions:
>
> - Constituency chairs/EC may wish to consult each other as to whether to
> put in joint request;
>
> - SG chair/EC could reach out to other GNSO SG chairs to find out if they
> have asked and if not, whether they intend to do so;
>
> - we ask SSR Review Team if they plan to investigate or ask ICANN for a
> more detailed explanation.
>
>  Cheers
>
> Mary
>
>
> Mary W S Wong
> Professor of Law
> Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
> Chair, Graduate IP Programs
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH
> 03301USAEmail: mary.wong at law.unh.eduPhone: 1-603-513-5143Webpage:
> http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on
> the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
> http://ssrn.com/author=437584
> As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with the
> University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of New
> Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have changed
> and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname at law.unh.edu. For more
> information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law, please visit
> law.unh.edu
>
>
> >>>
>
> *From: *
>
> Avri Doria <avri at ACM.ORG>
>
> *To:*
>
> <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
>
> *Date: *
>
> 4/19/2012 10:39 AM
>
> *Subject: *
>
> Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [] TAS Interruption - Update (17 April 2012)
>
> Hi
>
>
> I would also add that we might want to raise our voice in a demand for
> more information.
>
> Using my imagination as a once software engineer who spent years chasing
> glitches, we called them bugs, i know how the tiniest little bug in the SW
> can have a huge effect.  And my imagination is running overtime based on my
> own experience in small bugs with big effects.
>
> There is another assumption being made, that I ind problematic: that is
> that it is the people who created the system that are the ones hunting and
> auditing the glitch and its effects.   Again if my experience is anything
> to draw on, they have long since bought in an advanced group of specialist
> hunters/fixers.  I would be curious to know if that was the case.  ICANN
> has among its various contract crews some amazingly competent people, I
> trust (and hope I am right) that they have made outreach to the appropriate
> set of outside specialists.
>
> Besides, now that Rod has joined the glitch response team, as advertised
> in a ICANN tweet, we now know that this is something of presidential
> proportion.  Hence there is most definitely something to be sen here.  And
> while I appreciate the daily messages telling us they are working on it and
> everything will be ok, I would some real information.
>
> ICANN still has this notion that it needs to hold things close to the vest
> in order to stay out of trouble.  Years of trying to convince the
> organization that real transparency is the best solution have not yet
> really been groked, or become the world view of the organization, so this
> is another opportunity for leading ICANN toward transparency .
>
> avri
>
> On 19 Apr 2012, at 09:55, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>
> > Hopefully... But is there a resistance in our community (NCSG) to
> > discuss this? We should not speculate, we should move along, this is
> > just a glitch, even Rolls Royce does dumb things etc, are indications I
> > am wrong in trying to open up the debate?
> >
> > Avri rightly recognizes this is a major event, but that we should wait
> > for more details. I am OK with this, but while waiting we do no harm in
> > thinking of possible scenarios and consequences for which we will be
> > called to position ourselves.
> >
> > --c.a.
> >
> > On 04/19/2012 10:28 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
> >> Doesn't seem much point in speculating, blaming until the facts are
> >> known.  Perhaps it was pretty much unforeseeable, just bad luck (like
> >> Airbus' wings crack, Rolls Royce engines blow up…)  Or it might have
> >> been the result of dumb decisions.  I think given the money involved
> >> --already in ICANN's account from applicants, the money applicants
> >> have spent preparing, business plans, etc-- there won't be a cover-up.
> >> Applicants will want answers and expect they'll nag until the answers
> >> make sense (or they'll go to the courts.)  And I'm anyway of the
> >> happy-set who believes ICANN anyway wouldn't cover things up :-)
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca>
> wrote:
> >>> With due respect for McTim's esprit de corps for what he dismisses as a
> >>> technical problem, my main worry is the pile of legal cases Icann might
> >>> have to confront because of this "simple glitch" (so simple, in fact,
> >>> that has the entire organization running around for a week).
> >>>
> >>> fraternal regards
> >>>
> >>> --c.a.
> >>>
> >>> On 04/18/2012 05:15 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> And some of us have reflexive protective instinct that seems to
> indicate no cIr manager can do wrong.
> >>>>
> >>>> At this point there most certainly is something to be seen here.
> This was not a simple glitch that was fixed in a day.  This is a major
> event that is still ongoing with no end in sight.  I do not beleive in
> judging before the whole story is reveled, but do insist that the whole
> story be revealed.
> >>>>
> >>>> avri
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 18 Apr 2012, at 16:02, McTim wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Do we actually know this?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> of course not, this list just has to reflexively kick ICANN in the
> >>>>> 'nads when they are already on the ground....for me this whole TAS
> >>>>> thing is mountain out of a molehill....nothing to see folks, kindly
> >>>>> move along.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> McTim
> >>>>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> >>>>> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >
>
>

-- 
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Member, Board of Directors, CECI,
http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20120419/60be1a6f/attachment-0001.html>