If NSI can use its business model to build the same value for others as
it has done for itself, why the necessary opposition to GAC? They'd do
While I agree that the NSI business model can be cloned and
bring the same the same value to others, it's unclear how this
is facilitated by GAC that not only has the antithetical perspective,
but which is composed of the most Internet hostile possible set
of players. The GAC institutional membership reads like a
who's who of those who have targetted the Internet for destruction
over the past 20 years. Having them define for ICANN or DNS
service providers or ISPs what constitutes Internet law and
policy is not helpful.
include people and make it very boring to gain total legitimacy, perhaps
some kind of equivalence with the coverage of the ccTLDs. What percentage
of governments need representation for their decisions to have effect
that GAC's recommendations be forwarded to ICANN as constituted by a
consensus of approriate sovereign opinion? Maybe it's in the bylaws?
GAC is an autonomous self-defining body. They can establish
any process they wish, and in secret, and they have.
--tony
