Re: [ga] Tiered (Variable) Pricing
At 19:27 02/09/2006, kidsearch wrote: Chuck, one of the problems many of us have is that registries and other interests are represented on the ICANN Board and in every single supporting organization and committee while no one is there to really represent users. I know many who also represent registries, IP interests, and other businesses BELIEVE they represent users, but they don't. That is the bottom line and the main issue. Chuck, let this be clear. This is of no problem for the current IANA centric "mono-Internet" architecture of usage. There were different attempts to test a "multi-Internet" architecture of usage (with multiple roots). ICANN called for this to be experimented (ICP-3) and suggested IETF would do it. IETF was not interested. This does not mean that ICANN was not right. Users have developped their requirements, they have made de WSIS, they will now assemble in Athens IGF meeting. The problem is that they have correctly identfied their own organisation (states, users, economy, international entities). But they lack as much as ICANN does the technical support everyone needs. IETF is just not interested because they also believe they are THE users (this was true in 1986). I have fough at ICANN and IETF for all of us to get real. To stop thinking in terms of the Jon Postel's private mono-Internet. I did not succeeded. Today time has probably decided. We face two propositions: to give the mono-Internationalised Internet to the industry (and this can work only if a mono-proposition is received by an Internet mammoth), and to see the users' Multi-Internet developping (multinational, multilingual, multitechnology, multimodal, etc.). Since the IETF has chosen the first approach with people of the Mammoth leading the show, we the users are left with developping it ourselves. This is what we are doing. IMHO Verisign would be better of being with us (you would not be dismayed) than to ultimately feed the Mammoth. But your IETF guy in charge did not grasp it. jfc
|