ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] specific statements concerning the technical failure of ICANN

Debbie Garside wrote:

Hi Joe

Thanks for the history and your personal comments but I think we need to
move forward now.


We are moving forward Debbie.  On a wing and a prayer.

It is my opinion that we cannot run until we have walked. To this end it is
better for the GA to remain under the umbrella of the GNSO.

I disagree. We have been walking for at least a solid decade here at the GA. Years of organizational attempts, many of which were successful - i.e. the election of Karl Auerbach is one good example - have been rejected one way or another by the ICANN powers that be. Now it is my intention to bring to this place the necessary momentum to make a difference. Even if that difference is standing up and officially rejecting the GNSO or ICANN itself. As a body we have that power.

I am not advocating that we exercise that power. I am advocating a gentle reminder that the option exists and should be exercised if necessary.

When we have
proved ourselves as a professional body that can behave in a professional
manner providing professional comment and when we are accepted by the GNSO
as such, we can petition ICANN for the GA to become an Independent body.


If you want to go through the motions - I'm 100% behind you. I don't like the nonsense of going cap in hand to ICANN for permission - but if that will keep the familia happy - i'm 100% behind you.

With the list rules in place, perhaps now we can get down to formulating
some useful, professional comments on how policy can be created and updated
to the betterment of ICANN and the services they provide to the stakeholders
and end users.


I think there is very little competence here or anywhere else in ICANN for policy making. As clearly pointed out in my summary of the technical disaster ICANN has made of the Internet shows there is little to no understanding of the technical issues behind the root. One thing that should be pushed for is the making public of root logs or traffic analysis. I bet only a handful of people on the GA even know what those statistics are? Once the GA and other policy bodies of ICANN can look at those root analysis - only then will the commons be properly informed on the technical side of this disaster to make effective policy. Until then the song three blind mice is appropriate to almost all policy making.

I look forward to your professional and reasonable monitoring of the list.


That will be assured. I wait patiently as the list rules get their blessing from the powers that be.

amen
joe baptista

Best regards

Debbie



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joe Baptista
Sent: 16 August 2007 16:21
To: ga
Cc: tlda-members@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; `TLDA Member List
Subject: [ga] specific statements concerning the technical
failure of ICANN

I was recently advised that a statement made some time ago on
the GA has in someway caused the GA damages for me to have
said so publicly at this time.  The specific statement was
contained under the subject line "[ga] Good news announcement
- TLDA on the move again ....".

My specific words which seemed to cause offense are "It is
time to take over ICANN.  What I consider will go down in
history as the most useless organization in DNS history since
Jon Postel".

First I would like to make clear to all that my position as
list monitor of the GA GNSO ICANNT does not in any way
interfere with my personal feelings and knowledge of ICANN.

When I said ICANN was the "most useless organization in DNS
history" I was being nice.  In fact i should correct this
statement a preface to it that I hold ICANN personally
responsible for specific increases in technical error on the
Internet.  Thats real DNS traffic generated because of error
conditions at the ICANN root.

ICANN was founded on a promise.  That it would not cause
operational error.  ICANN inspires it.  ICANN is the reason
why we have to rethink root infrastructure from the outside
in.  Because ICANN has created a hell of a mess in fractured
name space.  The proof is available.

Now I stand 100 % behind the statement.  And I can back it up
with technical proof.  ICANN has caused serious damage to the
internet.  Specifically several root fractures.  No one root
looks like the other.

http://www.publicroot.org/technical/root-server-ID.txt

Multiple roots = multiple errors.

I hold ICANN personally responsible for this technical mess
which is a clear violation of RFC 2826.

ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2826.txt

Back in 2000 or so I discovered a trend in error rates that
corelated directly with the increase in roots.  By 2003 it
became a massive error rate at the root.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/02/05/dud_queries_swamp_us_internet/

Now I suspect today the error rate has significantly
increased to 99.99% of the root traffic which far exceeds
billions of errors per day.  And much of that error is from
the China Root (MII) and the Arab root systems.  Big
problems.  And alot of wasted bandwidth all dedicated to
error because root don't see each other.

Boys and Girls - you must all understand that the internet is
not a place to experiment with error rates.  People are
making money but the internet is suffering from lag and
congestion at the roots and being prevented from haveing a
functional error free dns.  And all this nonsense while the
dns grows exponentially in usage.

But I can't get too excited over this.  Europe has shown us
that icann is irrelevant in the big picture -
www.unifiedroot.com , www.inaic.com , www.tlda.net ,
www.publicroot.org .  Now it's time to deliver the technology
and bury the beast.

The GA has to walk away from the GNSO and become an
independent organ of icann.  Thats my two cents for reason.
If people  in ICANN are afraid of what I stand for, then my
position is one in which I could care less.

My only reason for accepting the monitor position at the GA
is that I know I can facilitate and deliver a functional GA
list.  After all these rules we have adopted were generated
by ICANN insiders lead by yours trully.  We can say that the
rules adopted here were structured after my good person.  So
I can assure everyone fair play.

Under the law I am a man who is not quick to judge.  I may
occassionally issue a barb her or there for good behaviour.
But overall I am a reasonable man in my own way.  That is as
your list monitor.

My hope for the GA is that it will get a voice at ICANN.
Long over due in my personal opinion.  My vision for the GA
is not to have it go begging to icann for a voice.  Indeed
the GA is either ICANNs salvation, or its burial.  Only ICANN
can appeal to us for salvation.  Thats the respect I have for
many of the people on the GA.  But only ICANN directors can
save ICANN .. and theres not much intelegence there.  Yes
these are seasoned business and industry people - but they
have no idea the damage icann is causing the networks, they
don't see any root server statistics.  Blind leading the blind.

So as monitor I will hold up someones right to censor ICANN
in a public forum.  But we now all have rules to play by.
And I think thats grand.  So lets all play nice, but niceness
should never cloak the truth.


regards
joe bapista

p.s. - maybe I should elaborate on that.





It is time to take over ICANN. What I consider will go down in
history as the most useless organization in DNS history


since Jon Postel.


Cheers
Joe Baptista







-- Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org PublicRoot Consortium
--------------------------------------------------------------
-- The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent,
Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet
community @large.
--------------------------------------------------------------
-- Office:
+1 (202) 517-1593 Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

--
Joe Baptista                                www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive,
Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Office: +1 (202) 517-1593
    Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084














--
Joe Baptista                                www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive,
Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Office: +1 (202) 517-1593
    Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

begin:vcard
fn:Joe Baptista
n:Baptista;Joe
org:PublicRoot Consortium
adr:;;963 Ford Street;Peterborough;Ontario;K9J 5V5 ;Canada
email;internet:baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
title:PublicRoot Representative
tel;fax:+1 (509) 479-0084 
tel;cell:+1 (416) 912-6551
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.publicroot.org
version:2.1
end:vcard
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>