The only thing preventing the gTLD from being implemented at will is
inclusion in the root-servers of the new TLDs -- as an alternative to the
DoC green-paper the proposal on the table (and not on PABs table) should
be the replacement of the root-servers to be run by an INTERNATIONAL
organization.
The ONLY thing providing "bite" to the green-paper is the fact that the
USG directly (or indirectly) control 1/2 the root-servers (including "A",
though I would suspect that NSI feels that THEY control "A"). Jon
Postel's "experiment" is something I'm behind 100% in the context of an
"experiment", and whether the timing was purposful or not I do think it
served the purpose of showing that the only authority that the USG has in
any of this is the fact that they "control" the roots.
I do not believe that there is a huge "US is the only country capable of
running the Internet" conspiracy behind the paper, nor do I fault a set of
US people wanting to have a say in the future of the Internet (considering
it was originally the US's "baby"). However, I think that the "US"
released ownership the day they allowed anyone outside of the US to have
an IP address -- it's a little late to try and stuff the genie back in the
bottle.
I do not now, nor have I ever 100% agreed with the gTLD-MOU, but I did
(and do) agree with it enough to sign it, and I think that if the USG lets
the "public" decide (in 2 years) that we will have something that looks a
whole lot like what is currently being attempted.
We need to move forward as if nothing has changed from 2 weeks ago (unless
CORE has decided to disband?). At this point the green-paper means
nothing to the process we are going through, at such a time as the USG
actually exerts some power and forces the roots to follow their course and
there is no alternative in place then it will be time for us to run and
hide.
We do still NEED a charter, we do still NEED to encourage more people to
sign the MOU, we do still have LOTS of work to do.
I will be filing my personal response to the green-paper (as I filed them
during the development phase), but I as an individual have minimal
influence, it is groups of people working together that will have the only
chance to bring about change.
If you belive that the USG is right then you need to remove your signature
from the MOU, if you belive that the MOU is right then you need to stay
and participate and "fight" for that belief.
IMHO,
Ron
---------------- Ronald J. Fitzherbert, President ---------------
Flying Penguin Productions Limited
Arlington, Virginia & Austin, Texas (USA)
-------------------- http://www.penguin.net/ --------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:22 PST