All, This may be of interest to some. It appears that another battle on the PSO is in the brewing... 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
On Thu, Apr 22, 1999 at 03:16:00PM -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > Should the PSO says "stop" to a DNSO proposal, you'd better expect to see > the fur fly on this point. > > Similarly, should the DNSO say "stop" to a PSO proposal, are you really > thinking that this group is going to say "oh well, such is the wisdom of > the DNS folks"? Nope. I expect that in the case of such a conflict there will be lots of discussion (perhaps very heated discussion, to be sure), and that a rough consensus decision will be reached across all the SOs and the ICANN board. > > -- your mechanical rigid, strict constructionist > > interpretation is yours alone. > > "strict constructionist" -- wow, a compliment. > > Yes, I do like to read the words to mean only what they actually say. As defined by you, of course. The problem is, I really honestly and truly don't read the words the same way as you. How do you deal with that? > I might note that my interpretation has the merit of keeping the various > SO's out of one another's backyards. Note: "interpretation". > Your interpretation has each SO stomping on the decisions of the other > SO's. That is in my view absolutely unavoidable. In fact there is a great deal of overlap in underlying concerns and expertise of the three SOs. > As they say, good fences make good neighbors. > > I want to build inter-SO fences. > > Your interpretation, that the SO's can interfere with one another on any > ground they chose destroys the separation of the SO's and the clarity of > their individual purposes. I prefer to think "collaborate" instead of "interfere". > On the other hand, I'm perfectly happy to entertain a suggestion that we > abandon the entire SO mechanism -- I have believed since the start that > SO's are a silly, anti-democratic idea So you should be perfectly happy with a model where the SOs are essentially homogeneous in concerns and powers. [...] > Of course you forget that the ICANN board is so hobbled by the ICANN > design that it can not take any effective action to reject an SO > initiative except on exceptionally narrow grounds. The facts, as evidenced by Wednesday's announcement, clearly indicate that the ICANN board can take decisive action when necessary. > So giving "advice" to > the board would be an exercise in irrelevancy. Nonsense. There are three board members elected by each SO that will be sure that the advice of an SO is given serious consideration. > Yes, yes, I know that you keep reading expansive powers into the ICANN > board, that you want to grant it powers that enable it to inject its > sticky fingers into all the moving parts of the Internet. The board will be elected by those moving parts of the Internet. > I'd rather that ICANN be extremely limited in its functions, in its > purposes, and in the damage that it can do. > > I certainly do not understand the energy being devoted to giving all the > parts of ICANN more power than they deserve or need. > > It seems to me that the principle used in security -- that of least > privilege -- ought to be applied to ICANN and to its component elements -- > grant to each only the minimum power it needs to get its job done. No problem there. But I think that 1) ICANN in fact has limited powers, and 2) those limited powers are presently far below what is actually necessary to get the job done. > Having the PSO stick its fingers into the business of other SO's is hardly > a way to keep things limited. I believe that in practice the distinction between the SOs will be largely irrelevant. There is substantial overlap in expertise and concerns between all the SOs. In fact, to me the commonality is far greater than the differences. -- Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be [EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
