Re: would that it were so (was) Re: NSI Stands with Internet Community

[Einar Stefferud <Stef@nma.com>]

I am late in responding because I was in Brazil on another mission all
last week, and just arrived home Sunday morning at 0800 to work my way
through the pile of stuff in my inbox.  Took me all day;-)...

I am flying to Singapore tomorrow and arrive there at midnight
Tuesday, so I cannot attend the "pre"-meeting on 11 August, but I will
be there for the originally planned 2 day IFWP meeeting.

I propose that instead of simply signing onto the NSI proposal, that
ORSC should take the draft as an initial point of departure of an ORSC
draft, and modify it into being our own ORSC proposal, to be meshed
with IFWP consensus, and then ask NSI and others to join ORSC in
further refining the draft in cooperation with others in the DNS
"industry" who wish to cooperate in forming a properly representative
Names Council under the proposed NEWCO.

The new names council should separately represent both ccTLD and
non-ccTLD registry and registrar operators, and should also represent
the ROOT SERVICE operators, and represent other interests such as
Trade Marks, Domain Owners Rights, and lower level DOMAIN ZONE
Administrators.  None fo these "groups" should be allowed to have more
than 25% of the votes in the council, because 25% of the vote is
already 50% of majority control.  By identifying 5 or 6 consituencies,
we can reasonably easily formulate a scheme for sharing control while
assuring that no single interest group can take over total control by
means of gaining 50% of the votes.

The ORSC tradition has always been one of inclusion, openness, and of
fair hearings for all concerned, and for avoidance of single interest
dominance which leads to single interest control of governance.  We
should scour the NSI draft charter and by-laws to assure that these
interests are included and that open "fair hearing" processes are
incorporated for all "councils" to be included under the NEWCO
"umbrella".

One way to add assuracne fo fair hearings to the proposed structure is
to require all NEWCOM "councils" to form "fair hearing" panels to
gather the sense of a wide range of interested parties for input to
policy decisions and coordination of operations.

If the NSI drafts are as close as they appear to be to meet our ORSC
objectives, then it should be a quick and easy job to complete the
required ORSC scrub and edit to make it into an ORSC sponsored draft.
And it should be easy for NSI, and hopefully others, to join ORSC in
proposing our revised draft for geneal adoption.

I suggest that we work in this diligently in Singapore, where at least
6-8 ORSC participants will be in attendance.  We should organize
ourselves first before inviting NSI to join us on our terms.

Those ORSC participants not attending in Singapore should help us to
do this, perhaps by serving as editors of the draft in support of
those of us who will be at the Singapore meeting.

I am not entirely clear on how this will work out, so we will need to
be innovative and play the scene by the seats of our pants.

I have no time left between now and driving to the airport, though I
will check mail in the morning on Monday.  Time now to go to bed;-)...

Cheers...\Stef