>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 10:42:26 -0500 (EST)
>
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 13 10:42:24 2000
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Received: from urda.heanet.ie (urda.heanet.ie [193.1.219.124])
> by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9110DF02A
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 13 Mar 2000 10:42:23 -0500 (EST)
>Received: from leviathan (pc88.heanet.ie [193.1.219.88])
> by urda.heanet.ie (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA10665;
> Mon, 13 Mar 2000 15:41:57 GMT
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sender: "Mike Norris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "'Michael Sondow'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: "'!Dr. Joe Baptista'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: [aso-policy] RE: [aso-comment] IP address holders - are they represented?
>Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 15:41:44 -0000
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>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 V4.72.2106.4
>In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Importance: Normal
>
>
>> > ICANN's membership structure (http://members.icann.org) is open to
>> > **all** members of the Internet community and offers a broad and global
>> > channel for input and representation in Internet governance.
>>
>> It doesn't serve any useful purpose to repeat nostrums and empty
>> formulas, does it? ICANN is supposed to be open to all stakeholders,
>> but in fact it hasn't been open to any end-users, either of domain
>> names or of IP addresses. The former have been consistently and
>> categorically excluded from the DNSO, and the latter have no direct
>> representation in the ASO. That is the objective reality. Saying
>> that they are included doesn't make it so.
>
>That's a rather sweeping dismissal and ignores what I said in the
>earlier part of my mail about the open processes of policy formation
>and representation in at least one region. I'd be the last to try
>to force one region's practices on another region, but we can learn
>from each other, and it may be that something useful in this instance
>may be learned from the RIPE experience.
>
>Regards.
>
>Mike
>
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dnso.com
It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR
