Hi Paul,
Hate to say it, but you had been warned:
At 07:02 PM 9/8/99 , Jay Fenello wrote:
> >ICANN is a
> >political creature, one that makes deals
> >along the way to support its ever increasing
> >agenda.
> >
> >While the technocracy is strong and unified,
> >you will be catered to by the powers within
> >ICANN, so that pressure can be brought to
> >bear on those targeted by ICANN. Initially,
> >this will be NSI, then the ccTLDs, then the
> >RIRs. Finally it *will* be the technocracy
> >itself.
> >
> >It is a classic progression whereby ICANN
> >uses a divide and conquer approach to assume
> >total control.
Jay.
At 12:25 PM 3/2/00 , Michael Sondow wrote:
>Received: from whois.apnic.net (whois1.apnic.net [203.37.255.98])
> by perfekt.perfekt.net (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA00416
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 04:46:06 -0500 (EST)
>Received: (from majordom@localhost)
> by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA95846;
> Thu, 2 Mar 2000 19:01:27 +1000 (EST)
>Received: from guardian.apnic.net (guardian.apnic.net [203.37.255.100])
> by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA95839
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 19:01:24
> +1000 (EST)
>Received: (from mail@localhost)
> by guardian.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA22107;
> Thu, 2 Mar 2000 19:01:05 +1000 (EST)
>Received: from hadrian.staff.apnic.net(192.168.1.1) by
>int-gw.staff.apnic.net via smap (V2.1)
> id xma022103; Thu, 2 Mar 00 19:01:02 +1000
>Received: from pooter (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by hadrian.staff.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA13302;
> Thu, 2 Mar 2000 19:00:55 +1000 (EST)
>From: "Paul Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Mike Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: "Louis Touton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ken Fockler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Pindar Wong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [aso-policy] ICANN/USG contract for IANA function
>Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 19:00:18 +1000
>Message-ID: <000d01bf8425$bb6b6fe0$ecf39aa8@pooter>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
>Importance: Normal
>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Precedence: bulk
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
>To: Mike Roberts
>Cc: Pindar Wong, Ken Fockler, Rob Blokzijl, Louis Touton, "aso-policy"
>mailing list
>
>
>The Regional Internet Registries (APNIC, ARIN and RIPE NCC) wish to express
>our concern at the signing of the "Contract Between ICANN and the United
>States Government for Performance of the IANA Function", which has been
>recently posted to the ICANN web site:
>
>http://www.icann.org/general/iana-contract-09feb00.htm
>
>We are concerned specifically by the lack of consultation by ICANN with the
>ASO, Address Council or RIRs themselves prior to signing this agreement, or
>during the drafting of the related ICANN proposal, which was apparently
>finalised on 2 Feb 2000:
>
>http://www.icann.org/general/iana-proposal-02feb00.htm
>
>We also express serious concern at the inclusion in this contract of policy
>provisions which are currently the subject of specific proposals within the
>ASO framework, and which are therefore not supported by the consensus of the
>ASO or Internet community.
>
>
>The ICANN Bylaws define ICANN's responsibility to "refer proposals for
>substantive policy" to the ASO where the content relates to the ASO's area
>of responsibility, while the ASO MoU clearly defines the ASO's
>responsibility for address policy. These documents are available at:
>
>http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VI
>http://www.aso.icann.org/docs/aso-mou.html (section 4b)
>
>
>The RIRs believe that the ICANN/USG Contract contains provisions based on
>substantive policies related to IP address management which are not
>currently accepted as consensus policies of either the Address Council or
>the Internet community. Specifically:
>
>(1) The policy under which ICANN can make allocations of address space is
>the subject of a specific proposal raised on the aso-policy mailing list on
>20 January 2000 (see
>http://aso.icann.org/mailing-lists/aso-policy/0001/msg00004.html), and on
>which the Address Council has not finished deliberating.
>
>(2) The administration of the "cable network block" 24/8 is the subject of a
>specific RIR proposal to IANA, which has not been answered.
>
>(3) The term "globally specified applications" is not recognised by the
>address community, and is clearly subject to very wide interpretation.
>
>
>While specific policies contained within the new contract are under
>reconsideration, and while important policy terms of the contract are
>ambiguous, it is not reasonable for ICANN to assume that such policies are
>recognised by consensus, nor to enter into significant contracts on the
>basis of that assumption without consultation with the relevant Supporting
>Organisation, the ASO.
>
>We therefore request formally that this contract be subject to review by the
>Address Council prior to its expiry on 30 September 2000, and that no
>further contract or extension to this contract be undertaken without all
>policy-related terms being specifically approved by the AC.
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>
>Paul Wilson, APNIC,
>on behalf of APNIC, ARIN and RIPE NCC.
>
>
>______________________________________________________________________
>Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>http://www.apnic.net ph/fx +61 7 3367 0490/82
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>See you at APRICOT 2000! 28 Feb - 2 Mar http://www.apricot2000.ne.kr
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>* on-line archive: http://aso.icann.org/wilma-bin/wilma/aso-policy *
>* To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello,
New Media Relations
------------------------------------
http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480
Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World
------------------------------------------------
"The unexamined life isn't worth living"
-- Socrates
