RE:

[Roberto Gaetano <Roberto.Gaetano@etsi.fr>]

Jay,

Do you *really* think that focussing on Gordon Cook's private war
against Don Heath instead than focussing on the organization of the
final meeting is going to help us getting some results achieved?

The problem of a final conference, as I see it, is very simple: is the
Berkman Institute willing to put its reputation at risk in organizing a
meeting that may end up in a failure? If yes, let's go. If not, let's
check whether there are any actions we may take in order to eliminate
(or at least minimize) the risk to a level that is acceptable to them.

In both cases, this means do something beyond the useless polemics.

Regards
Roberto

----------
From: Jay Fenello
To: ifwp-discuss@itu.int
Cc: list@ifwp.org; comments@iana.org; commerce@mail.house.gov;
Ira_C._Magaziner@oa.eop.gov
Sent: 98-08-27 05:28:51  
Subject: "snipers", "creamers" and "marginal players"


FYI, for tomorrow's CC:

>Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 22:28:10 -0400
>To: domain-policy@open-rsc.org
>From: Gordon Cook <cook@cookreport.com>
>Subject: Choices Faced by ISOC, IFWP and the Internet- What is likely to
> Happen and a reply to Don Health
>
>The Choices We Face
>
>We are now in the end game, things are becoming nasty.
>
>ISOC would like the closed-door process of new IANA corp by-law generation
>to continue.  It is trying as hard as it possibly can to control and
>channel the IFWP process so that it can step forward and hand Jon's bylaws
>to Becky Burr who may be expected to bless them and hand them on to Ira for
>ratification.  Becky and Jon get along just fine.  My sources report to me
>that given ISOC's anti NSI feelings and Becky's shared disdain for NSI,
>they consider this to be the most likely sellout of the Internet's
>commercial interests to be coming down the pike.  When considering his
>propensity to lash out when he would be better served by keeping quiet,let
>there be no mistaking Don's self interest.  Has anyone managed to find a
>copy of Don's contract on the ISOC web site?  Would be interesting to know
>for how many more years ISOC is locked into paying his salary.
>
>On the other hand there is some hope left in the IFWP process which
>explains why Heath and Abril abhore it so.
>
>The steering committee is not surprisingly fixated on the compromise
>meeting to be scheduled between now and the ratification meeting in mid
>september.  The compromise meeting is the key. It is the one that the
>ISOCians have not yet agreed to. It is expected to be small..... less than
>thirty people and will hopefully be run by professor Lessing.  Amadeau
>Abril and the ISOCians would like not more than ten.  (Lets see who they
>might be:  Iana, Isoc, Poc, pab, core, IAB, Arin, ripe, APnic and NSI.)  A
>stacked deck.  Left out would be open orsc, ispc, dnrc, euro ispc, CIX,
>APNIA (asian isp assoc - I may have the initials wrong), the CAIP (Canadian
>ISP assoc), ISPC association and AIM.
>
>IF PROFESSORS FRANKEL and LESSING CAN identify the right stake holders and
>get them in a room with food and sleeping bags and not let them go until
>they do compromise, then we will likely see draft articles and by-laws that
>a ratification meeting can accept.  i wish him well and I hope someone is
>working with him getting him up to speed.  it will be critcical that he
>makes the right choice of which stake holders to invite.
>
>Abril's  fear of failure is, given such circumstances, unwarranted.  What
>he fears is getting into a situation where ISOC and IANA will have to
>compromise.  This is what these people have long been determined not to do.
>
>If the ISOCians don't torpedo the process we still have a chance of
>succeeding.  If however they deprive us of a compromise and ratification
>meeting, then NSI, Open Orsc, CIX, ISP/C, DNRC, AIM and anyone elese like
>minded better immediately plan for legal action and congressional
>intervention.
<snip>


Regards,

Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.  
404-250-3242  http://www.iperdome.com