All, I am forwarding this as after some minor investigation. It appears that Tony Rutkowski is correct in his response to Michael Sondow. Some of this information has been pointed out before to the ITU, the NTIA, the DOC, and the ICANN (Initial?) Interim Board, with yet a proper or to my knowledge, any answer to questions the INEGroup or any other applicable organization has posed to the ICANN (Initial?) Interim Board to date, despite Esther Dyson's seemingly FALSE statements to the contrary. (See archives of ICANN's Comment E-Mail list for further evidence). Reference: http://www.icann.org/feedback.html, for archives listings of post covering these issues. Therefore we[INEGroup] would in the interest of the stakeholder and internet user community, request that the DOC along with most especially the house and senate commerce committees review this information that Mr. Rutkowski provided (See below), as well as review the ICANN E-Mail archives for further evidence... Kindest Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!) 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
> > Both ETSI and ITU fullfill these criteria that were discussed in > > POISSON already sometime ago. > >The criteria are rigged. ETSI and the ITU are being made part of the >PSO because they are signatories to the gTLD/MoU. The PSO is nothing Michael, They conveniently overlooked some things. The MoU has the following requirements: Open international voluntary standards bodies are defined as international organizations that plan, develop or establish voluntary standards. An organization shall be considered open and international if its standards and/or specifications development process is open to any person or organization of any nationality on equitable terms. It shall be considered voluntary if it makes no claim to compel use of its standards and specifications." The ITU as an intergovernmental organization, only allows member governments to participate "of right." Everyone else must follow certain procedures in Art. 19 of the ITU Convention. There is no mechanisms for any person to participate, and the terms of participation require annual payments that are so great as to effectively preclude the participation of even small companies. In addition, the ITU require that to participate, the national administration having jurisdiction over the organization must approve. ETSI's requirements are not quite is rigorous, but participation is hardly open, I'm not aware in any case, it's open to persons; and the financial requirements are significant. In the case of the ITU, the International Telecommunication Regulations - a treaty instrument in force - requires that "administrations* should comply with, to the greatest extent practicable, the relevant CCITT Recommendations." See Art. 1 para 1.6. In many countries, the ITU standards are obligatory. Similarly, many of ETSI's standards are obligatory in many European Union jurisdictions. For that reason, neither body has ever in the past been regarded as a "voluntary" standards body. But these are just additional examples of ICANN violating their basic instruments and IETF conveniently looking the other way. --tony
