Re: Articles (was: IAB Last Call on new IANA Statement)

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>]

In message <Pine.BSI.3.91.980902150322.29974A-100000@avon-gw.uk1.vbc.net>, Jim 

>Correcting this problem is not that difficult.  It can be corrected
>by creating a broad and diverse membership, and then making key 
>provisions of the articles and bylaws changeable only by the action
>of a large majority of that broad and diverse membership, and by 
>having the board selected by that membership.  This is, incidentally
>the corporate model described by the consensus documents of the
>European Commission's Brussels conference of 7 July.

I have qualms about the lack of membership myself.  But -- and it's
an important demurrer -- I have no idea how to define the membership
in a way that is "broad and diverse" and unlikely to be packed by
overly-interested parties.  Frankly, I welcome all reasonable suggestions.
>
>The IANA drafts ignore these possibility: they describe a corporation
>without a membership, where in large part the board selects itself
>or is selected by external bodies having similar problems with
>accountability.

In fact, the IANA draft describes a hybrid model, where half of the
directors are indeed part of a self-perpetuating group, but the other
half do represent members -- the SOs.  To be sure, that raises the question
of how their memberships are defined, especially for the Names Council; see
above.