Jay Fenello [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote on Monday, December 20, 1999 at 8:58 AM: > >More problems with ICANN > >Excerpts from: > >http://www.intgov.apdip.net/apdip_new/detail_headline_gkiiwriteup.htm > > [snip] > >At the centre of our concerns is the problem, that the current >reform process is mostly negotiated outside the established >structures for international co-operation, which have been >carefully crafted to safeguard national sovereignty, due >process and equitable participation and have been >endorsed by the International community through a formal >process of information, participation and representation. I'm not surprised at APDIP's position, given that APDID is an initiative developed and funded by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and executed by the UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS). Quite naturally, they feel that international activity outside of the UN banner is morally suspect. Once again, an organization that feels slighted and that would like to enhance its power has issued its list of "problems" and calls for "initiating a broader discussion on these issues" as a "first step." (Yes, indeed, let's yakkity-yak about this for another few years.) I find this tiresome. I respond much better to concrete alternatatives than to those who can only tell me what they *don't* like about something. When people come to me with their problems, I usually stop them politely and let them know that while I'm happy to help them carry out solutions, it's probably better that *they* figure out the solutions first. (This is a nice way of saying that there's no whining allowed.) In the cases where APDIP does suggest alternatives, I find their solutions alarming. APDIP claims that "the international settlement of charges for Internet infrastructure disfavours developing countries." It draws a contrast to the PSTN, which "has long known politically negotiated revenue sharing arrangements between carriers in developed and developing countries." Lovely. Let's apply the international settlements process -- designed for a world of monopoly, state-controlled carriers -- to the Internet. Know why Internet telephony is a good thing for international calls? It's not because packet networks have a technical advantage over circuit-switched for delivering voice services. (They don't, unless you're willing to let quality of service go to hell.) It's because the high prices caused by the cartel-driven international settlements process have compelled people to find a different way to do business. Look where market forces are allowed to set international calling rates and you'll find where rates are lowest. Case in point: US-UK, where I can call for 10 cents a minute. One of APDIP's concerns is amusing in a sad way. APDIP protests that decisions on important issues such as dispute resolution have been taken by ICANN by "initial directors on the ICANN board that have been appointed and not publicly elected." Hmmm... so I suppose I can assume that APDIP's officials are directly elected? And that their member countries (e.g. Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam) are bastions of democracy that are immune to the "danger of big-business bias" that they see in ICANN? Heh. Pete ___________________________________________________ Peter J. Farmer -- Director, Optical Communications Strategies Unlimited http://www.strategies-u.com Mountain View, CA +1 650 941-3438 (voice) +1 650 464-1243 (mobile & voice mail) +1 650 941 5120 (fax)
