Re: [ga] Re: ICANN before the US Senate...

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Leah and all former DNSO GA members or other interested parties,

  You may be right Leah.  It is to our members also very evident
that ICANN's policy making is theater of the vaudeville variety in many
instances as well.  Of course as an observer you likely have taken note
of the lack of accountability that Sen. Burns referred to in his remarks
as have other members of the Senate Committee in earlier
ICANN BoD and staff reviews that the Senate Committee and
the House counterpart have noted in the not too distant past.

L. Gallegos wrote:

> Elisabeth,
> It IS theater.
>
> Call me naieve, but I cannot for the life of me see what ICANN offers
> ccTLDs.  IMO, the cc's should come under the IANA function only.  What
> would a contract with ICANN accomplish for them?
>
> ICANN should also get out of the business management (or micromanagement)
> and stick to technical.  Karl is right about this.  ICANN has made "some"
> progress in bringing those involved in IDN to the table to discuss the
> issues from a technical standpoint - how they should be interacting in the
> DNS.  It should do nothing else.
>
> ICANN should be working toward SLA's with root server operators and
> overseeing the truly important issues of security, stability and
> reliability.  This it has NOT done.
>
> There was nothing mentioned about the IANA function, yet this is even more
> important than the DNS.  IANA should be separated from ICANN and should
> have no bearing on the registries or registrars or ccTLDs other than
> performing the clerical details - a one person job.
>
> In any case, expecting anything to come of these hearings is a bit
> foolish, given the lack of oversight thus far.  I, personally, have no
> expectations that anything good will come of it other than having
> testimony in the Congressional Record for posterity.   It can't just
> disappear at least.  In order to have any real meaning, however, there
> would have to be testimony from a great many more individuals representing
> many more sides and revealing the issues that will have the greatest
> effect on us all.  This hearing was, like the others, narrow and biased.
>
> Nancy Victory's testimony was predictable, of course, in her praise for
> ICANN's "accomplishments?".  It's a given that the MOU will be renewed and
> ICANN will continue to do what it has always done - mission creep,
> micromangement of businesses relating to domain names and nothing concrete
> in its technical mandate.  If ICANN were a public corporation, it would
> have been either eradicated or completely reconstructed long before now.
> No group of shareholders would put up with this.  One single audit would
> have been enough to cause replacement of staff and board.  If it were
> funded with tax dollars, I'd be afraid to be a board member because of the
> allowed mismangement.  It is most definitely not functioning as public
> benefit corporation, since it does not benefit the public, but only the
> special groups who back it.  The mere fact of lack of membership for all
> stakeholders, with members rights is enough to negate any possible
> legitimacy it might have had.
>
> Leah
>
> On 4 Aug 2003 at 19:44, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:
>
> > Caveat:
> > As a non-US citizen, I feel watching Congress hearings like going to a
> > theater - the actors play their role, I am sitting in the remote audience.
> > I did appreciate Paul Twomey's conclusion said to the US Senator Burns: "I
> > want to help establish that a public-private partnership of the kind that
> > ICANN has become is in fact a feasible and appropriate way to deal with
> > matters like the DNS, over which no single government can claim
> > sovereignty, but which all governments and many private parties have
> > important and legitimate interests in seeing function well."
> >
> >

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard
===============================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801