=------------------------------------------------------------------------=
SUPPORT FOR THE "PARIS DRAFT PROPOSAL" FOR THE
FORMATION OF THE DOMAIN NAME SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION
AND APPENDIX OF ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
BY THE ASSOCIATION OF INTERNET PROFESSIONALS (AIP)
AND NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC. (NSI)
=------------------------------------------------------------------------=
Complete Draft of Proposal: http://dnso.association.org/
=------------------------------------------------------------------------=
February 5, 1999
Attention: Esther Dyson, Michael Roberts, Geraldine Capdeboscq, George
Conrades, Greg Crew, Frank Fitzsimmons, Hans Kraaijenbrink, Jun Murai,
Eugenio Triana, Linda S. Wilson
To the ICANN Board of Directors:
The Association of Internet Professionals ("AIP") is pleased to be a
submitting organization of the "Paris Draft Proposal" Application to form
the Domain Names Supporting Organization ("DNSO"). This letter of support,
and the Joint AIP/NSI Appendix (containing suggestions for additional
provisions), is an enthusiatic endorsement of the principles behind the
"Paris Draft Proposal".
Our Philosophy
After considering the principles in the United States Government's June 5,
1998 Statement of Policy (the "White Paper") and the strictures of the
Memorandum of Understanding Between the U.S. Dept. of Commerce and ICANN
(the "DOC MOU"), the AIP believes that the Supporting Organization described
by the "Paris Draft Proposal" meets the requirements of ICANN and the United
States Government by providing an open, transparent and bottom-up supporting
organization that fairly reflects the global and functional diversity of
Internet users and their needs.
The AIP approached the Supporting Organization process with the twin
goals of providing ICANN with substantive expertise on technical and
policy issues while also providing an opportunity for bottom-up
contribution and comment from the many interests, dynamic and diverse,
regional and functional, that comprise the growing Internet community.
The best reflection of the AIP's approach to the creation of the DNSO is
the Bylaws, which are included with the Application. These Bylaws reflect
a fully formed conception how this DNSO will gather and synthesize
suggestions and criticisms from the worldwide Internet community and how
it will form these into policy recommendations. These Bylaws have the
appropriate structure, policy recommendation process, and open and
transparent mechanisms to serve ICANN well.
The Proposed DNSO Structure
The "Paris Draft Proposal" DNSO is managed by a diverse group of individuals
from constituencies that will fairly reflect the current technical,
professional and individual interests in the policy of the Domain Names
System ("DNS"). These internationally diverse individuals will form the
Names Council contemplated by the ICANN Bylaws. The Names Council will be
managers of a bottom-up policy recommendation process that will take place
in the DNSO's General Assembly.
While the Names Council provides equal, balanced representation from
functional areas and interest groups, the General Assembly will allow all
of these interests, and others that may develop over time, to have an
open and public discussion on DNS policy. It allows debate to cross
constituency lines and forge consensus from disparate voices representing
different industries and interests.
The open nature of the General Assembly allows the Names Council to
observe distinctions between majority and minority voices and to more
accurately gauge support for proposed policies. the AIP also believe that
an open forum will provides a fertile environment for fostering creative
solutions and innovative policy recommendations from the diverse Internet
community. These are voices that might otherwise be lost in a pure,
constituency-based equal representation system. Membership in the General
Assembly will be open to anyone who wishes to join.
As noted below, the General Assembly model ensures that the policy
recommendation process meets both the White Paper's requirement that
policymaking "reflect the bottom-up governance style that has
characterized development of the Internet to date" (White Paper,
"Principles for a New System") and the DOC MOU's requirement that ICANN's
private coordinating process "reflects a system of bottom-up management."
(DOC MOU, Section II.C., "The Principles.") Indeed, this bottom-up policy
recommendation process is at the heart of the AIP's proposal.
The Policy Recommendation Process
Whether requested by ICANN or acting upon its own initiative, the DNSO
Names Council or 5% of the General Assembly can initiate the policy
review process that is described in detail in Section 5 of the attached
Bylaws. This process begins with the creation of a Research Committee,
balanced in its composition, and ends with a Report and Recommendation
that represents the considered and researched opinion of the DNSO.
After the Research Committee is formed, its initial task is the
formulation of an Issue Statement that fairly frames the issue on which a
policy recommendation is requested. The General Assembly then provides
its thoughts, proposals, and suggested solutions in a public forum. The
Research Committee will distill the comments from the General Assembly
into a draft report that will be published for open comments and public
hearings. This review process continues through additional iterations,
each time refining the policy recommendation and moving closer to
consensus.
If a Report and Recommendation is ratified by the General Assembly, the
Names Council will forward a detailed, well-researched, implementable
policy recommendation to the ICANN Board.
Meeting the Principles of ICANN
The AIP believes that the principles of the "Paris Draft Proposal" best meet
the principles embodied in the White Paper and ICANN's agreements with the
U.S. Government (the DOC MOU). Specifically, both of those documents state
that the following are guiding principles for ICANN: (a) Stability, (b)
Competition, (c) Private, Bottom-up Coordination, and (d) Representation.
* Stability. Uncertain or changing DNS policy or inadequate implementation
of that policy will lead to instability on the Internet. The "Paris Draft
Proposal" ensures that policy is certain and implementation is possible and
effective. Seats on the Names Council are guaranteed for persons in those
industries responsible for implementing DNS policy and those groups which
have greater than 5% membership in the General Assembly. Second, procedures
are available to individuals and companies that believe a draft policy
recommendation is counter to the interests of the DNS or not possible to
implement. The AIP believes that new policy recommendations should be made
deliberately and thoughtfully through the Research Committee process, as
hastily considered suggestions may have a destabilizing effect if reversed
or modified after implementation.
* Competition. The AIP proposal provides all interests an opportunity to
impact the development of DNS policy equally. It neither provides a boost
to emerging competitors nor allows established companies to become
entrenched and immune from market forces.
* Private, Bottom-up Coordination. The General Assembly assures that no
opinion will be missed and that no voice will be filtered through a
representative or industry trade group. A hallmark of the internet has
been its amazing ability to allow anyone to impact policy development
through grass roots activism. The "Paris Draft Proposal" has exploited this
new medium and honed this grass roots activism through the creation of the
General Assembly. Professional interests and industry expertise are
guaranteed through the Research Committees, but the AIP believes that the
truly novel, creative solutions will come through the General Assembly.
* Representation. The proposal provides a balanced Names Council from
diverse constituencies with an interest in DNS policy, and the General
Assembly provides an open forum for all to discuss their concerns,
without regard to constituencies or professional affiliations. The
General Assembly also ensures that the voices in the policy
recommendation process mirror the voices on the internet itself. They
will be global and functionally diverse.
* * * * * *
The AIP believes that the "Paris Draft Proposal" Application presents a DNSO
for everyone. For those established interest groups that have invested in
the Internet and have a clear monetary stake in the outcome of DNS policy,
this model provides a place for them to have a direct hand in the formation
of DNS policy. For those individuals and companies impacted by DNS policy
and who care about its development, there is a place for them as well. And
for those gestating and as yet unknown entities that will have a stake in
the Internet's bright future, there is a place for them to speak and perhaps
coalesce into new constituencies, representing new, previously unheard
voices.
This is a DNSO that no one will own and that cannot be captured by any
special interest group. It is a DNSO that will provide expertise and
thoughtful policy recommendations and in which ICANN can place its trust,
assured that DNSO Reports and Recommendations meet high technical
standards while also enjoying broad support from the Internet Community.
It is flexible and responsive. It is a DNSO that can meet the changing
needs of both ICANN and the Internet community.
The AIP is thus pleased to be a submitting organization of the "Paris Draft
Proposal." It and Network Solutions, Inc. have made additional suggestions
in the attached Appendix. We are confident that the bottom-up processes that
has served the Internet to date will continue to serve ICANN well and are
appropriate, and in fact required, for the DNSO.
We thank the Board for its consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
Mitchel K. Ahern, MAIP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Chairman of the Board
Association of Internet Professionals
Andrew Q. Kraft, MAIP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Executive Director
Association of Internet Professionals
Bret Fausett, MAIP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Chair, DNS Policy Action Committee
Association of Internet Professionals
The Association of Internet Professionals (AIP) is the premier
professional association for Internet professionals worldwide.
AIP, founded in 1994, is the largest and fastest growing
professional association in the industry. In order to unify,
support and represent the global community of Internet
professionals, AIP represents over 8500 individual members and
110 corporate members in a wide variety of Internet industry
segments from 50 countries worldwide. AIP provides the benefits
and programs that allow both its individual and corporate
members to succeed in today's Internet/Intranet/Extranet
marketplace. The organization also serves as the voice of
Internet professionals and industry corporations before the
public, press, and within the online community on issues
shaping the future of the Internet. AIP's web site can be
found at www.association.org.
=------------------------------------------------------------------------=
APPENDIX OF ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS FOR PARIS DRAFT PROPOSAL
Supported by the Association of Internet Professionals
and Network Solutions, Inc.
=------------------------------------------------------------------------=
The Association of Internet Professionals and Network Solutions, Inc. are
committed to the process of ensuring that the Bylaws of the Domain Names
Supporting Organization reflect, to the greatest extent possible, a
consensus of the internet community. To that end, they each endorse the
"Paris Draft Proposal" and wish to state by means of this Appendix that
they favor and support the addition of the following provisions to the
"Paris Draft Proposal:"
* It is proposed that Section 3.2(a)(1) be amended to read:
1. Constituencies other than the constituencies representing registries
and registrars, shall represent at least 5% of the members of the General
Assembly.
* It is proposed that Section 5.9 be amended to read:
In addition to filing a Fair Hearing Petition, any member of the
Registry, Registrar or ISP constituency which may be required to
implement a proposed policy pursuant to a contract with ICANN may ask,
after the First Request for Comments is issued, that such proposed policy
recommendation undergo an implementation preview from the registries. The
Names Council shall establish an implementation preview process that will
determine whether a substantial plurality of those registries which vote
to support such implementation or are or will be contractually committed
or able to do so. Policies that do not meet this criteria may be
forwarded to ICANN by the DNSO, but only if the Names Council
specifically informs the ICANN Board that the policy has not passed the
implementation preview, along with the details of the results. Those
participating in the implementation preview shall collaborate to submit a
timely report on their actions and views, including a record of the vote
of each member of the constituency, to the Names Council, and if
necessary, this Report will be forwarded to the ICANN Board with any
proposal which has not passed the implementation preview.
* It is proposed that a new section 6.4 would be added, which would read:
6.4 Preservation of Records
All records of the DNSO (including, but not limited to, Reports and
Recommendations to ICANN and all drafts of such Reports, minutes from all
DNSO committee meetings and public hearings, comments and proposals
received from third-parties, and mailing list archives) shall be
maintained and preserved on-line.
* It is proposed that a new section 10 would be added, which would read:
10.0 Membership Committee
A Membership Committee of the DNSO shall be formed, comprised of one
member of the Names Council, who will also act as the Committee's
Chairman and report on Committee activities to the Names Council, and one
member of each of the Constituencies. The Membership Committee's function
will be to review applications for voting membership in the DNSO.
The Names Council member of the Membership Committee will act to assure
that all applicants for membership in the DNSO fulfill the minimum
criteria for membership in the DNSO. The other Committee members will act
to assure that applicants have applied with the appropriate
Constituencies, and that they fulfill the Constituencies' minimum
requirements for membership.
The Committee will circulate applications for membership among its
members, or otherwise perform its function, with as little expenditure of
time and effort as possible and by employing Internet-based
communications. It is understood that the Committee's function is to
include in the DNSO as many entities with an interest in domain names as
possible, rather than to exclude any entities or parties by devising
restrictive practices or by exerting personal prejudice, and that cases
of rejection of an application for membership in the DNSO will be
unusual, the onus of defending such rejections bearing on the Committee.
There will furthermore be no investigation of applicants beyond the
ascertainment of their personal identity, nor any other measures
restrictive to individual freedom and the right to privacy.
We formally suggest that these changes be considered by the wider community
for the addition to and amendment of the "Paris Draft Proposal."
Signed,
The Association of Internet Professionals
Andrew Q. Kraft, Executive Director, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Solutions, Inc.
Donald N. Telage, Senior Vice President, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
=------------------------------------------------------------------------=
Letter of Support & AIP/NSI Appendix of Additional Provisions for "Paris Draft"
Andrew Q. Kraft, MAIP, Executive Director Fri, 5 Feb 1999 22:29:46 -0500
aip.txt