RE: Public trust & IANA? - monopolistic rule-making

["Lockett, Nick" <nlockett@Sidley.com>]

QUOTE: 	
Section 3. NOTICE AND COMMENT PROVISIONS
(b) Prior to adoption of any policies that substantially affect the
operation of the Internet or third parties, the Board will:
				(i) provide public notice on the Web Site
explaining what policies are being considered for adoption and why;
				(ii) provide a reasonable opportunity for
parties to comment on the adoption of the proposed policies, to see the
comments of others, and to reply to those comments; and
				(iii) after a reasonable comment period,
take action on the proposed policies, establishing an effective date, and
publishing the reasons for the action taken.
UNQUOTE
Which appears to mean:
(i)We will tell you what  we intend to do
(ii) We will seek your comments 
(iii) after a reasonable comment period, we will do as we choose -
regardless of our obligation to act in public trust function, your comments
and our pre-existing obligations.
Shouldn't iii) have something built in about requiring a majority of
Registrars to expressly consent or not more than 5 registrars to object or
similar.  IANA still appear to be ignoring the fact that their authority to
act is only by consensus and constrained by public trust functions. Where
pre-existing rules have operated they appear to have obtained the status of
contractual terms and those terms could only be changed by consent.
Nick Lockett
E-Mail: <mailto:NLOCKETT@sidley.com>
Private E-mail: <mailto:netlaw@netlaw.co.uk>
	This message is the personal opinion of Nick Lockett -no liability
is accepted