Re: [ifwp] Re: Domain Names, a privilege? (was: Re: theoretical question)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Karl and all,

Karl Auerbach wrote:

> > Having a  governing board democratically elected by their Domain Name
> > owners would give them that legitimacy.
> > Can we not agree on a phrase that makes this a requirement for the NewCo?
>
> Yes, it is possible to conceive of a new entity, NewCo, which mandates
> that domain name registries and registrars behave in certain ways and
> enact certain policies.

  We agree that this may or should be something that the proposed Namescouncil
should take a look at rather seriously at some point.  However any
policies of this kind should be subject to Membership approval by their vote.

>
>
> I personally would do that as part of the contract through which
> DNS registries/registrars receive their license to operate from the new
> entity.

  Agreed.

>
>
> Some would prefer a different method and trust that this control would
> come as the a result of pure competition and have minimal top-imposed
> conditions.  Your comment about ccTLDs not evolving in that way is
> interesting.

  Yes and ccTLD's may have to stand out as a possible exception to thesepolicies
which makes enforcement and even enactment of such policies
of this possible nature difficult to justify.  At any rate, any policies
that are proposed should be subject to Stakeholder/membership approval.

>
>
> But jumping back to the top-down approach.
>
> We see in the IANA proposal that domain name holders are pretty much kept
> out of any effective role or means to impact the policies of the
> Supporting Organization for domain names.

  Yes and this has proven to be a serious problem of late.

>
>
> (We've seen that on the IP address side, that a majority of those who
> would compose that Supporting Organization have indicated that they would
> drive policy to permit the board of directors merely power to reject.)

  Yes, and we strongly disagree with this procedure.  It should be in the
handsof the membership by majority vote.

>
>
> In other words, we do not see the development of any proposal, especially
> the IANA proposal, which provides a top-level body that is reflective of
> the needs of "the little guy", the simple domain-name holder, the small
> ISP, the simple IP address user.

  Or for that matter many large organizations and user groups.

>
>
> In other words, the policies that are likely to be imposed under the IANA
> proposal are more likely to be pro-registry/registrar than protective of
> the putative "rights" of domain name holders or IP address users.

  Most likely correct.  At the least that is how the IANA has reacted in thevery
recent past, such as the creation of ARIN for instance.

>
>
>                 --karl--
>
> __________________________________________________
> To view the archive of this list, go to:
> http://lists.interactivehq.org/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=ifwp
>
> To receive the digest version instead, send a
> blank email to ifwp-digest@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
> subscribe-IFWP@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
> unsubscribe-ifwp@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email andy@interactivehq.org.
> ___END____________________________________________

 Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com