No real objection, but who decides? What if someone is elected who doesn't
meet those qualifications, vague as they are? This seems to me to be
problematic.
> · All Internet stakeholders shall have the right to
> participate in the DNSO and the Names Council (NC) through
> representative constituencies and appropriate representative
> organisations.
But not individually? What is an "appropriate representative organization"?
And how are they picked and by whom. Or is any organization invited to
participate?
> · Such participation shall include representative
> organizations of technical, business, policy, legal and
> consumer interests that use domain names or participate in
> operation of the DNS. (note that we are talking of use, not
> necessarily ownership of domain names)
> · There shall be broad international representation
> within the DNSO and NC reflecting, at a minimum,
> international levels of use of domain names and
> participation in the Internet. (This should not be read to
> preclude the participation of those countries/regions which
> have not been able to fully take advantage of the Internet
> because of financial or technical constraints in the DNSO.
> The goal should be to develop a representative model, which
> respects the geographic diversity and participation of the
> world at large).
> · The DNSO and NC shall seek to be independent and
> establish principles and processes which are independent of
> any single industry or interest group and must not be
> susceptible to capture or undue influence by any sectoral
> interest group.
> · Individual stakeholders, whether or not also members of
> a representative stakeholder organisation, shall have the
> right to petition the DNSO directly on issues within its
> remit.
For this last to make any sense at all, it needs to be fleshed out.
>
>
> 2. Powers
>
> · The DNSO and NC shall advise the board on all matters
> pertaining to the DNS.
> · The DNSO shall nominate three directors designated to
> represent it on the Board.
> · The NC, in consultation with the DNSO, shall develop
> and recommend actions, policies and procedures with regard
> to the DNS such as:
> · recommendations with regard to the adding and removing,
> operation, management, assignment and development of gTLDs
> and ccTLDs.
Negative. The ICANN's role, and the DNSO's role, with regard to ccTLDs must
be minimal. Their object should not be to remove ccTLDs, especially on the
basis of as-yet undefined criteria, nor should it have any say in how they
are managed or developed or assigned, except within the limits of a basic
contract with ICANN for use of the root. ccTLDs and gTLDs should and must
be treated separately. This will be a show-stopper for most ccTLDs.
> · actions, policies and procedures to deal with
> trademark/intellectual property and privacy issues relating
> to the DNS.
> · The policies and procedures recommended by the NC/DNSO
> shall be promulgated in keeping with the need to
> maintain/enhance the overall stability of the Internet and
> its utility as a global medium for communication and
> commerce among all parties.
This language is unclear. Does this mean that all policies shall be in
keeping with the need to maintain/enhance.... or does it mean that the
promulgation shall be in keeping with the need to maintain/enhance? If the
latter, does this mean that some policies might in fact not be promulgated
on the basis of "security" considerations, i.e. that secret policies a la
NSI would be considered?
> · The DNSO shall have the right to comment on any
> recommended actions, policies and procedures put forward by
> other Supporting Organizations of the Board.
>
>
> 3. Membership of the DNSO and NC
>
> · Membership categories in the DNSO should reflect the
> broad and diverse nature of Internet stakeholders.
> · Procedures must be in place within each stakeholder
> constituency to develop a system of selection and
> appointment of representatives.
> · To maximize the benefits, effectiveness and breadth of
> participation within the DNSO, participation by
> representative organisations (including groups representing
> individual owners/users) as opposed to individuals should be
> encouraged.
Indeed I think we should encourage as much participation as possible -- but
I sense that this is not the real import of this paragraph. I think what
this really means is that individual participation should *not* be
encouraged. And *that* is another show-stopper.
> · Each category shall be entitled to nominate the
> specified number of representatives on the DNSO. The DNSO
> representatives will be responsible for appointing members
> of the Names Council. The representatives from each
> category on the NC shall be drawn proportionately from the
> geographical regions described in the by-laws.
> · Objective qualifications for DNSO and Names Council
> representatives should be developed.
> · Term periods should be considered in light of
> difficulty to get the most qualified people to serve for
> long periods of time. Staggered 2-year terms should be
> considered.
>
>
>
> 4. Policy making process
>
> · All actions, policies or procedures recommended by the
> DNSO and/or the NC must comply with both the DNSO and ICANN
> by-laws.
> · Such recommendations must be made as a result of a fair
> and open consultative process with all Internet stakeholders
> that may be affected by a recommendation.
>
>
>
>
> ------- End of Forwarded Message
>
>