Jonathan Zittrain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If IFWP is now a closed list, and involuntarily purged of certain earlier
> members, I'll stop posting to it and ask to be de-subscribed myself.
>As the graf of my msg you quote below suggests, I certainly don't/didn't
>mean to post exclusively to IFWP even with it as an open list--though I did
>mean to stay within the bounds of netiquette as I understand it by not
>cross-posting general discussion to a bunch of lists. I'll certainly post
>all membership-related stuff to open-rsc.
So then the open root server list will become the official list for
the ICANN related issues?
So then the fragmenting of the discussion will follow the line
of those who are willing to fragment the Internet?
>Andy, you run the list, right? Is what Jim says true? ...JZ
Didn't Andy just post that he had trouble with his ISP and changed
it?
If that is the case, shouldn't there be an effort to find out if
that is the cause of the problem that is being presented?
But doesn't that raise a bigger problem. My proposal included
the provision to work for a general online newsgroup/mailing list
situation so all those who were interested in being part of
the discussion on what should happen with regard to the essential
functions o fthe Internet.
Since the U.S. govt really had no understanding how to solve the
problem of figuring out a management structure, they needed input
from all those interested in participating. Thus they needed to
support the proposal I submitted, regardless of whatever other
proposals they supported.
But it seems there isn't any real interest in figuring out the
problem on the part of whoever is making the decisions.
Instead there only seems to be an interest in cutting off
access to discussion so whatever the plan is that is being unvelied
can go its merry way into implementation..
I have been looking at the problem of administering the essential
functions. It seems it is as much a problem of removing the
constraints to communication among the different networks
and people who make up the Internet, as it is anything else.
However, those charged with solving the problem by the U.S. govt
are more intent on cutting off communication between themselves
and the diverse people and networks on the Internet, than it
seems any ohter task.
When MILNET and ARPANET first split into two separate networks
in 1983, MILNET set up a mail bridge to the ARPANET, so
there was minimal *not* full Internet access.
It seems more like ICANN is trying to limit access between
those in IANA and dealing with domain names etc. with the diverseve
people and networks on the Internet than that they are trying
to create any helpful structure for solving any real problems.
.
But the challenge thru this confusion is to figure out what is
needed and then how to make it happen.
Ronda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Netizens: On the History and Impact
of Usenet and the Internet
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/
in print edition ISBN 0-8186-7706-6
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
