At 3/16/99, 07:33 PM, Esther Dyson wrote:
>THanks for the question, Jay.
>
>We tried to address this subtly in the FAQ question about constituency
>formation, because we want to let the constituencies from themselves -
>bottom up. But we certainly want open constituencies, in terms of point of
>view if not necessarily what the point of view is about. That is, if a
>constituency purposely excludes one side of a broad range of views of, say,
>registrar opinion, then there would be some justification for a second
>constituency of registrars to form itself. An interest group is most
>likely better off getting its opposition to join it rather than fostering
>the creation of an opposing constituency. Thus, we encourage constituencies
>to call for members publicly, and given that the DNSO is part of ICANN, I
>would assume they can use icann-announce to do so.
Continuing with your example, suppose the ccTLD registries
organize, but exclude second and third level sub-delegations.
According to your scenario, the excluded parties should simply
organize (i.e. .per.nu, .com.au, etc.) and form a constituency
of our own. Then, we would get three appointments to the Name
Council, instead of having to share with the rest of the ccTLDs.
Sounds good to me ;-)
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.
404-943-0524 http://www.iperdome.com
>On your choice of constituencies, I defer to others' comments, and to your
>own good sense.
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Esther
>
>At 10:49 AM 16/03/99 -0500, Jay Fenello wrote:
>>
>>Hello Esther,
>>
>>One of the decisions of the ICANN Board was to approve
>>a DNSO that featured overlapping constituencies. This
>>creates a problem common to all constituencies, namely,
>>where do we draw the lines.
>>
>>For example, Iperdome may desire to join the following
>>constituencies, for the following reasons:
>>
>>ccTLD registries
>> Iperdome is the official registry for
>> the .per.nu domain, sub-delegated via
>> RFC-1591
>>
>>Commercial and business entities
>> Iperdome is a business entity
>>
>>gTLD registries
>> Iperdome is a prospective gTLD registry
>>
>>ISPs and connectivity providers
>> Iperdome is an ISP
>>
>>Non-commercial domain name holders
>> Iperdome's clients are almost exclusively
>> non-commercial domain name holders.
>>
>>Registrars
>> Iperdome acts as a registrar for personal
>> domain names.
>>
>>Trademark, intellectual property, anti-counterfeiting interests
>> Iperdome is a trademark, and .per(sm) is a
>> service mark.
>>
>>My concern is that certain constituencies are
>>attempting to form in private, behind closed
>>doors. This could easily result in a biased
>>process, one that excludes legitimately
>>interested parties.
>>
>>I hereby request that the ICANN Board clearly
>>indicate that this is not acceptable, and that
>>any constituency wishing to be recognized by
>>ICANN must form via an open process.
>>
>>So far, I have only seen "public" postings to
>>form the registrar and the non-commercial domain
>>name holders constituencies, yet I am aware of
>>"private" postings for the trademark and ccTLD
>>registries constituencies.
>>
>>Please clarify this situation now, before
>>things get any worse.
>>
>>Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>>Respectfully,
>>
>>Jay Fenello
>>President, Iperdome, Inc.
>>404-943-0524 http://www.iperdome.com
>>
>>
>
>
>Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
>chairman, EDventure Holdings
>interim chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>1 (212) 924-8800
>1 (212) 924-0240 fax
>104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
>New York, NY 10011 USA
>http://www.edventure.com http://www.icann.org
>
>PC Forum: 21 to 24 March 1999, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
>High-Tech Forum in Europe: 24 to 26 October 1999, Budapest
>Book: "Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age"
>
