Roeland and all,
Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> At 09:29 PM 1/14/99 +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> >At 23:33 13/01/99 -0800, you wrote:
> >>At 01:02 AM 1/14/99 -0500, Gordon Cook wrote:
> >>>For the past 48 hours I have done nothing but research and write the
> >>following.
> >>>
> >Dear listmembers
> >Sorry for not coming out and offer strong support for Dave Farber's call
> >for open ICANN Board meetings.
> >I guest for many on the list the call was a case of preaching for the
> >converted and no -one saw the need to support Dave or criticize him, hence
> >the somewhat stunned silence.
>
> I wrote a piece, directly to the ICANN BoD, last Novenmber. I got very
> polite acknowlegement from Esther. It was official, from the CEO of MHSC,
> FWIW. I know they read it. I recieved complements on the letter. They took
> no decernable action. I was not the only one, there was a great hew and cry
> about the ICANN operation policy. I support Dave in his call and all, but
> where was he when it could have counted? Day late and a dollar short, comes
> to mind. If he'd have thrown his weight in, back then, it might have made a
> difference. Now it is down to the wire, we either protest the one-source
> contract or stand down. Those are the only options, other than an open war
> of attrition. The latter being *real* bad for business.
Roeland as we have talked on the phone several times about this very
subject, you are well aware that the latter if the ICANN continues down the
path it has chosen to thus far take that the "Latter" here is likely the course
many companies and organizations will be forced to go down, along with
several legal actions against ICANN and its thus far flawed process.
>
>
> The point that Gordon makes, and he is 100% correct, the alternatives have
> to be a responsible party. They must have the means, the skill, and the
> credit, to win a bid on such a contract. BWG wasn't even a legal entity,
> ORSC was, but ORSC was not prepared to take the contract from ICANN. This
> left only ICANN, a slim choice for the NTIA. None of the rest of us were
> prepared to ante-up the ponies required to run the IANA. ICANN magically
> was. I hate to say this, but the ORSC hand was called. Given the
> time-frame, I doubt any of the players could have raised the required
> capital, other than ICANN, because of the GIP funding.
We (INEGroup) both have and had the funding and also the ability, so
I am afraid I cannot agree that there were not other choices that the NTIA
could have made.
See:http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/proposals/ineginc/ineginc.htm
for further details. We also received a very nice letter from Becky Burr
regarding this as well which I posted to the iFWP and Domain Policy
list at that time.
>
>
> Now let me throw some numbers around to get this DNSO thing in perspective.
> If memberships were flat and the costs are $50US then with 10,000 domain
> holders we are talking about $500KUS annual revenue. There are 2 million
> domain holders in COM alone. This is the size of the pie for the DNSO, an
> organization that does nothing much more than talk. The ICANN position of
> not wanting to cover liability for the DNSO is ludicrous in light of these
> numbers. It indicates that they either don't know what they're doing, which
> I don't believe anymore, or there are rules and plans in place that we know
> nothing about.
Agreed completely here Roeland. The ICANN knows what it is doing,
it doesn't however care to do so in an open fashion for reasons that they
give which are weak and most likely false.
>
>
> One possibility, in light of statements that the DNSO has no operational
> ability, why would domain-holders join? Let's get down to basic marketing
> here. Are you going to pay $50US per year just to kibitz? Hell no, you can
> do that for free. No matter what the DNSO decides/recommends ICANN can
> over-rule. In other words, the DNSO is not even empowered to spread peanut
> butter, only recommendations for how to spread it. So, would you spend the
> $50US? What's the point?
The only point is that you have some influence collectively on the ICANN.
It may be that that influence will be ignored in some of maybe even
many cases. This would be a dangerous slippery slope for the ICANN
to take however. And lets not forget also that the membership of any
DNSO will also be the same folks that are members of the membership
organization within the ICANN structure as well...
>
>
> Which such an emasculated DNSO, the ICANN can basically do what it wants.
> In fact all the SO's are useless. The control is in operations, that's
> where the rubber meets the road. The silly part is, I don't see the revenue
> stream for ICANN there either. How do they stay solvent? It looks to me
> like they have cut themselve off from all sources of funding. Since the BoD
> is noted more for their business acumen, I think appearances are deceptive.
> There is a huge potential funding source that they are not revealing.
>
> I have a bad feeling.
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Roeland M.J. Meyer -
> e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
> Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
> Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com
> ___________________________________________________
> KISS ... gotta love it!
>
> __________________________________________________
> 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____________________________________________
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
__________________________________________________
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____________________________________________
