Re: [ga] Reminder

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jefsey and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
stakeholders/users,

  The pro's of ICANN's behavior are few, the con's are many and
varied as well as seemingly expanding..  Working in concert with
government/agovernments is what the MoU and White paper were
all about originally.  ICANN's BoD's and Staff's have found it
difficult to work with government/governments and stakeholders/users
and as a result have created more problems than they started out
with in 1999.  As a result stakeholders from other countries have
become increasingly more dissatisfied with ICANN, and ICANN has
become more entrenched and uncooperative with governments
as well as stakeholders/users and thereby causing harm that was
avoidable and unnecessary.

  So surely you don't want ICANN to become a government in and
of itself?

J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:

>    At 05:40 25/02/2005, Danny Younger wrote:
> >Jefsey,
> >My dedication is not to the ICANN cause; rather I am dedicated to
> whatever
> >entity can effectively keep governments at arm's length.  At the
> moment,
> >ICANN is the only institution that is so positioned to safeguard my
> >interest, so for now they get my support as well as my criticisms.  A
>
> >properly articulated Strategic Plan is important because it will
> detail
> >what we can expect in the post MOU environment.  If what we will be
> told
> >does not correlate well with our own vision for the future then we
> will
> >have to seek out or create new alternatives.  Either way, for now it
> >wouldn't hurt to offer ICANN some guidance.
>
> This is what I mean when I say the ICANN cause. And I do not object
> you to
> try and us to help. But I saw nothing of interest in the ISP except
> self
> satisfaction on points I consider as detrimental to my interests and a
>
> bureaucratic growth. This is why I ask to list the pros of ICANN.
>
> What you say is that ICANN keep goverments at arms's length. I can
> understand that desire from an American citizen in a country which
> signed
> an MoU with ICANN (the only one), where the Congress decides of SLDs
> (the
> only one), decides of whois, decide of the wheather and of the globe
> warming, etc. I tend to consider the French Gov the way the law voted
> by a
> democratic Parliament describes it, as the protection of the internet
> naming public service. Not perfect, but to know I expect the French
> Gov
> Army to protect me. I expect its other Agencies to serve (not to
> direct or
> harm) my own interests.
>
> As the operator of my SNHN (small network, open network), which has
> the
> power and the bandwidth of the US international packet switch services
> 15
> years ago, I wish that Governments keep ICANN at arm's length as well.
>
> As an SNHN operator (an @large) I miss a few features:
> - a universal open naming space
> - a fully multilingual naming space (not an internationalized
> spoofing/phishing cacoscripty)
> - a free permanent IP address and the support of ISP/peering rotation
> - no spam, spoof, phishing, etc.
> - protection against DoS, drop in bandwidth, root server dysfunctions,
>
> privacy/intelligence protection
> - sensible propositions against digital divide and e-colonization
> - the direct interoperability, interintelligibility, interusability of
> a
> Multilingual Internet
> - clear indications of the intended network evolution/innovation in
> the
> years to come
> - sovereignty and security protection for my country, my porximities,
> my family
> - a comprensive, updated, technical Internet book. You know what they
> have
> 4000 RFCs :-) The motto is KISS !!!
> - intelligent extended services (for.example: is ICANN discussing a
> world
> geologic alarm system?)
>
> etc.
> Let get real.
> jfc
>
>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827