Re: Draft 3 or Genesis of new IANA or who is god?

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

Gordon and all,

Gordon Cook wrote:

> In draft 3 of the IANA by laws Jon Postel has crafted a structure with a
> strong potential for viability.  He asks for our endorsement of the
> structure.  Unfortunately we cannot buy the house that Jon has built
> without knowing who will be running it.

  It is not so much who, but how the board and council members will be
determinedthat is the most important aspect and lack there of in the third
iteration of the
IANA's bylaws that is the most important aspect that is missing.  But in essence
we agree with you Gordon.

>
>
> **There is nothing there to indidcate how the nine at large board members
> are to be chosen.**  Yet presumably it is they who will confer legitimacy
> on the names organization. And allow three members from that organization
> to join the board.  I find it amazing that we are supposed to endorse the
> structure before we have any notion of how those who run it will be
> selected.

  Exactly my point above. And we too find this to be utterly amazing given
thestatement that Jon has made in saying that they have tried to participate and
consider all points of view, yet we have only gotten pronouncements on the
IFWP mailing list from Jon and NO discussion or debate from him.  This is not
what we could call participation.

>
>
> Jon talks about the open process he has run.  It is a process where
> information is collected and taken into a smaller circle of advisors who
> meet and discuss options and then make their Pronouncements informing the
> rest of us what will happen.  Personally I don't find that process open.  I
> am amazed that Jon would ask for endorsement of the structure without a
> word about where the initial board members will come from.

  Agreed.  However It is and always has been our concern that as Jim Flemminghas
pointed out on a number of occasions that Jon and the IANA have already
determined whom and how Board and council members will be selected, in fact we
contend that Jon has already determined whom the Interim BOard members
will be.  This is not in compliance with the NTIA's white paper as to a
"Bottom-up"
approach and is leaving out the vast majority of Stakeholders.  It appears
that this is just another rendition of the IAHC failed process renamed.

> Of course we
> may find that in the plenary later this week Jon will announce the board
> members.  Boom!  fait accompli.  There is the new corporation and its
> directors who will be pleased to review the application of the WORLD WIDE
> ALLIANCE OF TLD REGISTRIES to become the names organization since it has
> had a running 30 day head start. Boom.  here are the names organizations
> three IANA board members: Fay Howard (CENTR) Prof.Kilnam Chon (Korea)
> Bernard Turcotte (Canada)
>
> In general the process as executed by Jon is upside down.  We have by laws
> but no articles of incorporation.  Under normal US law we must have the
> articles first and the by-laws second.

  Yes, and we have ask the IANA for those articles of incorporation time and
timeagain with NO response.  This is also one of several problems that the IANA
has demonstrated in the past and is again demonstrating yet again of lack
of responsiveness, thereby rendering the contention of being transparent invalid.

>
>
> Jon needs to answer  some questions.  1.  where are the articles?  2. who
> will file the articles of incorporation?  In most states it takes 3 people.
> Those 3 can become the incorporating board with the power to chose the
> other board members.   By what legal method is the first board to be
> constituted?  If it is there (draft 3) I sure as hell missed it.  Article
> VI says the initial board shall be the nine at large members and says
> nothing about how they are to be choosen.  To be legal you have to have
> incorporators with real names and identities.
>
> The genesis is vague.  Will Jon personally select the board members?  Who
> are to be the incorporators?  That is what Jon needs to be telling us now.
> The **articles** of incorporation must name the incorporating board.

  All good questions.  Jon, can you enlighten us?

>
>
> What is the mechanism for selecting the original nine board members?
> How does one become a board memebr?  Must be spelled out in the articles.
> Jon really ought to have enough respect for us to tell us now.  Asking for
> endorsement of the by laws at this stage is putting the cart before the
> horse.
>
> A self perpetuating board?
>
> It turns out that the initial board is to be self perpetuating.  Section 4
> subsection d reads:  (d) Nine (9) At Large Directors,
>                       selected pursuant to a process to be
>                       established by a majority vote of all
>                       the At Large Board members of the
>                       Initial Board;
>
> It is a pretty safe bet that jon's allegedly open process has choosen the 9
> at large board  members already.  i will wager that they have one or more
> of three qualifications.  ISOC membership.  IETF membership. Or Reasearch
> and education membership.
>
> Left out existing commercial registry (NSI), domain name rights coalition,
> open orsc, trade mark interests, the assoc for interactive media, cix, and
> isp/c.

  Not to mention that they are leaving out many commercial interests as well.

> Leaving such folk out is unconscionable in view of the fact that the
> nine at large members are choosen to represent the commercial, non
> technical, interests above....

  Well, what about the commercial technical interests?  Seems that they have also
beenleft out ot this Third set of bylaws that the IANA has pronounced as well.

> IE the rest of the world apart from the
> protocol, names, and numbers folk.  Until these questions are answered take
> 3 of the by laws is an empty shell, handed down once again ex cathedra from
> Jon and ITAG.  BTW it is time for ITAG members to styand up and be counted.
> do they endorse what Jon has done?  yes or no.
>
> Later today will be another teleconference of the IFWP steering committee.
> It is very clear that the ISOC forces will now say that there need be no
> closure meeting since Jon has ended the process by handing down version 3
> of the by laws.  I suggest that it is incumbent on the 11 majority members
> of IFWP to see that the closure meeting is held in order to see that this
> open "process" of Jon does not impose his narrow choice of a self
> perpetuating Iana board on the inter net.  If jon goes forward  on his
> present course I predict that we will see a failure of this process marked
> by legal action by those whom he chooses not to enfranchise, or a failure
> of the process marked by government take over.
>
> ***************************************************************************
> The COOK Report on Internet            New Special Report: Building Internet
> 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA  Infrastructure ($395) available. See
> (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax)           http://www.cookreport.com/building.html
> cook@cookreport.com                    Index to 6 years of COOK Report, how to
> subscribe, exec summaries, special reports, gloss at http://www.cookreport.com
> ***************************************************************************
> -
> Send 'unsubscribe' in the body to 'list-request@inet-access.net' to leave.
> Eat sushi frequently.   inet@inet-access.net is the human contact address.

 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