Re: "stakeholders" was: Re: [ga] Re: ICANN before the US Senate...

[Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, L. Gallegos wrote:

> Now, given that all people have an interest in ICANN's decision making, how do we 
> go about ensuring they are able to assert themselves and have their rightful place in 
> that function?

Well, it's pretty much the same kind of thing when one turns an automobile
into an airplane - you gotta disassemble the thing, melt down a lot of the
parts, and forge new parts according to a new blueprint drawing by new
architects.  It's not a job for incrementalists.

One of the good things about ICANN's retreat away from matters of true 
technical stability is that ICANN can now be restructured without risk of 
harming net stability.

As I said to the Senate more than a year ago, it is possible to pull ICANN
offline, put it on ice, and rebuild it entirely with there being the
slightest impact on the day-in-day-out ability of the net to carry packets
with dispatch from hither to yon or to resolve dns queries promptly and
accurately.

		--karl--