Dan Steinberg wrote:
>I may not use the same words as Stef but I have to agree with the
>content.
>3 days (or less if you live in the wrong time zone) to prepare a
>formal response (or even coherent comments)on some of these issues is
>totally inappropriate.
What appears to be happening seems like a "divide and conquer" approach.
There are a lot of balls in the air which, when they land, will determine
the future of the DNS. For example, look at the dizzy schedule of meetings
and issues before us right now:
* ICANN's annointment of a domain name supporting organization
* ICANN's accreditation guidelines for registrars
* WIPO's RFC-3 proposal (deadline for response is March 12)
* NIST's meeting on the Future Management and Administration of the .US
Domain (March 9)
* Apricot 99
* ICANN Board Meeting
* IETF's 44th meeting
..and more.
Most of the active participants who care about these issues also have jobs
and other responsibilities that impede the ability to respond to RFCs and
public comment requests in an comprehensive and timely fashion.
What is the purpose of the accelerated track to recognize SOs (before a
membership structure is even established), develop accreditation guidelines
for registrars (controversial in and of itself), and consider the WIPO
recommendations. What will remain left for the *elected* ICANN board to do
after this whirlwind of quasi-policy decisions are made by a board that was
imposed upon the Internet community through some secret selection process
and chosen because the individuals had (we were told) no involvement with
DNS issues.
The way things are unfolding with ICANN has gone from disappointing to
downright scary.
Ellen Rony Co-author
The Domain Name Handbook http://www.domainhandbook.com
============================ // ================================
ISBN 0879305150 *=" ____ / +1 (415) 435-5010
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ ) Tiburon, CA
On the Internet, // \\ no one knows you're a dog
