Comments on Dr. Frankel's Wisdom and Advice on Self-Organizing to Manage IANATreasures

[usdh@mail.ccnet.com (steve)]

October 22, 1998

TO: Ira Magaziner
Senior Adviser to the President,
Policy Development
Old Executive Office Building,
Room 216
1700 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20502

CC: Honorable Mr. Pickering, Subcommittee on Basic Research; Hon. Mr. Bliley,
House Commerce Committee;  Hon. Mr. Daley, National Telecommunications and
Information Administration; Hon. E.B. Johnson; Mr. Joe Sims, Attorney,
ICANN, & Mr.
Schorr, University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute

FROM: Stephen J. Page, Individual Respondee to DNSpolicy@NTIA.DOC.GOV;
Participant, Open Root Server Consortium (ORSC), Independent Researcher,
Network Systems, Pleasanton, California, US, representing Internet
.a(sm)-.z(sm) Name Registry, T: 925-454-8624 email: usdh@ccnet.com, and
Developer, the i(r).com(sm) network access, connectivity and content service
to the global community of i(r)ndividuals, email: ichannel@home.com

RE:Comments on Dr. Frankel's (Law Professor, Boston University) Wisdom and
Advice  pertaining to the self-organizing process pertaining to scalable
network systems design & managing Internet assets (Treasures), October 22,
1998

To Mr. Magaziner, and all interested parties in scalable network systems
management design,

Dr. Frankel wrote regarding the Self-Organizing process & the creation of
ICANN to succeed IANA:

Dr. Frankel:
        In a political environment the emphasis may be on who says and not
on what is said. In this case, it is a mistake to assume that we can ignore
important principles if they are advocated by "unimportant" people. What is
being said may be just as important as, or more important than, who says it.

Comment:
        What is being said IS more important than who is saying it, unless
there are circumstances which provide the person who is speaking to have
unique experiences which others might not understand otherwise.  The major
weight of importance should be attributed to the timeliness of content
(ideas) which have a proven basis in science and humanities.  In the void
created by Dr. Postel's death, the timeliness factor is more important now
than it was two weeks ago, therefore elevating the importance of the need
for structural content (a framework) which lasts.

Frankel:
        Some of the aspirational principles for ICANN are difficult to
achieve because none of the organizational models that we have (and we have
many) fits exactly the new ICANN.

Comment:
        One organizational model fits, but it has not been traditionally
viewed from the lens of a governing institution, although that is the
structure which geographical free market-linked governing bodies, which tax
a percentage of all economic revenue, tend to move toward, some slower
(United States), some faster (Albania's pyramid structure).  The
organizational model which fits is a multi-level organizational structure,
which is a network system design.

Frankel:
        That does not mean that the principles
cannot be followed. It means that we must work harder to achieve them. If it
fits politically one group to avoid the principle of balance of power and
power sharing (because the group believes that it is or will be in control)
the group should think again. Control can shift. The group may find itself
in a worse position than had it shared power.

Comment:
        In a risk-minimized scalable network system, power should be
balanced symmetrically among all participating elements, which is one of
the principles in all recognized life forms in nature (symmetry).  All
potential elements must first be guaranteed the right to exist, if one is
to build a system which is able to scale *inclusively*.  The issue of
control is a moot point in an organizational design which is based upon the
proven mathematical principles of the Universal Network Systems Law(c),
because such a network system will scale in the future to harmonize with
the observable structural framework which governs all network systems.
(June 4, 1998 issue Nature)

Frankel:
        Further, the power may shift to organizations that NO ONE WANTS.

Comment: In the future, there may be more "power" represented from various
language-networks, such as a French-speaking network, German-speaking
network, an Albanian-speaking network, each of which may want their own set
of top level domains, for their own socio-cultural purposes.  In an
Internet which has predominantly grown up around an English-speaking
paradigm, the challenge to existing empowered institutions posed by an
inclusive and scalable network systems policy, is one that needs to be
recognized, and dealt with at the outset, which is now.  It is a structural
challenge.  The fact that none of the existing stakeholders may want
another language to be represented at the root-server level where domain
names map to IP numbers, (because it will dilute their English
language-monopoly), should be recognized as a temporary situation due to
the infancy of the Internet.  If we apply the principles which are present
in the U.S. Constitution, which recognize freedom of speech and equality,
while recognizing the new mathematically proven fact which recognizes all
network systems behave in a predetermined structural way, over time, we can
plan for the inevitable from the design point (that's where we are at)
foreward, building a framework, which is modeled after the universal
network systems framework (see Universal Network Systems Law(c) which
exists.

Frankel:
The internet communities are invited to
build an institution--long term-- not a one shot deal.
Winning the moment one may lose the eternity.

Comment:
        This is exactly why an asset-trust which protects the
language-treasures (domain names) and mathematical treasures (IP numbers),
which recognizes the universality of these assets along with the equal
right of a domain name or IP number to exist (like net-oxygen).  Such a
trust will exist in perpetuity, under the watchful eye of the United States
government, without operational control.  However, the role of the U.S.
Government as protector should remain, insuring that the principles of
protections, guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, will be
applied wherever the assets are used (universally), because of the recently
recognized mathematical proof that a mathematical framework exists for all
networks, biological, physical, social, etc., and that includes Internet.

Frankel:
        In short, I suggest that rather than back a position with lack of
government's power to require compliance with certain principles it may be
better to focus on the arguments for the position and the vision for the
future. The organization that the United States government graciously
invited the Internet communities to create is not and cannot be like the
ones that exist today. If the communities are creative, cooperative, and
principled they will have pioneered a unique new structure.

Comment:
        The key statement is to "focus on the arguments for the position
and the vision for the future".
        This is exactly what I have attempted to do, to answer the
question, "What is the most appropriate structure which guarantees
scalability over time," an answer which is dependent upon openness to
diverse use of language assets (domain names) and mathematical assets (IP
numbers), where non-discriminatory policies (principles of equality) are
applied, all of which fit with the framework of the proven mathematical
reality which we now know applies to all interconnected network systems
(Universal Network Systems Law(c). (June 4, 1998 issue Nature)

Stephen J. Page

(c) Copyright, 1998.  Stephen J. Page.  All Rights Reserved.


THE AUTHOR:

Stephen Page is a network systems researcher, former Regular Army Officer,
U.S. Army, a recognized business network architecture designer as a project
manager for a DARPA funded Network Architecture grant in 1994, and practicing
optometrist. He is 41 years old, resides and practices Northern California, a
graduate of University of Santa Clara (bachelor), University of California
Berkeley, (doctorate) and Boston University (masters degree in Business
Administration). He is a participant in the IFWP as a Virtual Attendee
submitting comments via
email, as well as a participant with the Open Root Server Consortium (ORSC),
representing Internet .a(sm)-.z(sm) Name Registry, a California Corporation.
He is also the developer of the i(r).com(sm) network access, connectivity and
content service to the global community of individuals, email:
ichannel@home.com, T/F: 925-484-0448.