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

[jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Joe and all,

  Yes we have now and have had within ICANN at the staff 
and bod level a number of "Blind Mice".  Now it seems the 
GA has added a new "Blind mouse".  

  Going to ICANN with hat in hand or booty kissing will
never achieve anything of any relevance.  Such and 
approach rarely ever does.  Nice guys finnish last.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Aug 16, 2007 8:59 PM
>To: debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Cc: 'ga' <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, tlda-members@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, '`TLDA Member List' <members@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: 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
>

==========

Regards,
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"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.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Registered Email addr with the USPS Contact Number: 214-244-4827