RE: [ga] Questions for Joe Baptista / Eric Dierker, and why the GA list should be ended

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>]

Karl Auerbach wrote:
> 
> That's not my memory; but in any case, isn't is rather petty 
> to encapsulate the *only* body in ICANN that is open to 
> individuals to one single subject among the several that ICANN covers?

Well, if the GA was not part of the DNSO it would have been incomprehensible
why the election of the GA Chair had to be ratified by the Name Council.
Anyway, to have an ICANN-wide body open to individuals for discussion on
general items can be misinterpreted as being a membership body, which would
have unintended legal implications under California law (just my personal
opinion, IANAL).

> 
> Global IP address policy is becoming increasingly important 
> as IPv4 addresses become more and more scarce - one can use 
> the internet without a TLD, but one can not use the net 
> without IP addresses.  So if this GA is locked into names, 
> then where is the GA for addresses?  It certainly isn't in 
> the RIRs - those only do regional IP address policy, not global.

It would be an ASO matter. The public mailing list is
aso-policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (see http://aso.icann.org/lists/index.html).

Cheers,
Roberto