On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Kent Crispin wrote:
[All of the original is retained for the benefit of the EuroISPA
members CCed.]
> Jim
>
> I have been forwarded a letter from stating that you would like sign
> the MoU as a representative of ISPA UK, be a proxy representative for
> the 83 members, and thus have 83 votes in PAB.
This is not what I wrote. I wrote primarily as the president and chief
spokesman of EuroISPA, not on my own behalf or on behalf of ISPA UK.
In particular I don't know that I would be appointed as ISPA UK's
representative, nor am I certain that I would want to act as such.
However, it is probably close enough for a discussion of principles.
> A similar issue has come up before in PAB -- Amadeu Abril y Abril
> asked if he could have multiple votes, based on the fact that he
> represented 4 actual signatories (not just proxies). This question
Perhaps you don't know what the word "proxy" means, but what we are
suggesting is that one person would be the actual representative
appointed by and representing each of a block of signatories.
In the case of ISPA UK, that block of signatories would be the
individual ISPA member organisations.
> was discussed by the general membership, and a clear consensus
> emerged.
>
> According to the MoU, PAB is supposed to operate according to "rough
> consensus" principles -- section 5c:
>
> c.The PAB shall apply rough consensus modes for determining its
> recommendations to the POC.
>
> The clear source for this clause is the IETF rough consensus model.
>
> The question of representation under such a model has been addressed
> in the IETF. For example, the IAB charter (rfc1601) says the
> following:
>
> Members of the IAB shall serve as individuals, and not as
> representatives of any company, agency, or other organization.
>
> When Amadeu posed his question I wrote a position paper on this topic, and
> presented it to the list. There was no significant dissent. The
> principle adopted is as follows:
>
> - any signatory of the MoU may designate an individual to
> serve on PAB
> - each individual in PAB gets one vote
>
> One person, one vote. This rule falls directly out of the "rough
> consensus" mandate.
I would have to dispute this. There is simply no relationship
between the two concepts.
The LINX, the London Internet Exchange, has long preferred rough
consensus models. It also has a normal system for voting by
proxies. "Rough consensus" is actually an alternative to voting;
it means that you keep on talking until most people are satisfied.
Normally, at this point those who disagree say something like
"well, there's a clear majority in favour of doing this, so we
won't oppose it."
When and if EuroISPA's members choose to sign the gTLD MOU, I
believe that you will find that their interpretation of section 5c
of the gTLD MOU differs from yours.
> Further, size or composition of the signing organization make no
> difference. PAB has no reasonable way to accurately and independently
> evaluate those things. Nor do we have any way of evaluating the
> significance of claimed representation -- for example, you claim to
> represent 83 ISPs. But you may have been voted in by a 42-41
> majority. In general PAB has no way of evaluating the legitimacy of
> such claims.
One of the (many) reasons that people refuse to sign the gTLD MOU is
this sort of reasoning. Both EuroISPA and ISPA publish their
memberships. In both cases the member organizations appoint
individuals to represent their interests. How we do that is not
really germane. ISPA's members join ISPA to simplify and reduce
the cost of representation in London. EuroISPA's members created
EuroISPA to simply and reduce the cost of representation in Brussels.
The existence of EuroISPA means that when Europe's ISPs want to talk
to someone at the European Commission, they don't have to send 500
separate delegations.
Neither do they want to have to appoint individual spokesman on the
PAB.
We can supply membership lists and member contact details. What we
would do is poll our members and determine who wanted to be represented
on the PAB. Those who didn't would not appear on the list presented
to the ITU or POC. Neither would those who chose to sign individually.
In any case, under the current scheme, it is the ITU's responsibility
to determine whether we in fact represent the organisations that we claim
to - not yours.
> Nor does PAB make any special distinction about what kinds of entities
> are entitled to representation -- ISP's, advocacy groups, other
> businesses, other organizations -- all interested parties may claim a
> variety of constituencies that have some kind of weight. Once again,
> PAB has no objective way to evaluate those.
>
> Be that as it may, I strongly encourage you to sign, and to get as
> many others to sign as possible. It may surprise you, but many of
> the ideas you have expressed publicly (a "MoU-lite", for example)
> have floated around on PAB for a long time, and, under present
> circumstances, a persuasive voice could be decisive.
The decision to sign is not mine. I certainly could sign on behalf of
VBCnet, but would not do so unless I believed that this action was
supported by ISPA UK and EuroISPA. The ISPA UK Council and the
EuroISPA Council must be persuaded to sign.
While it may be difficult for you to understand, we believe that the
PAB is unrepresentative and commands little support in the real world.
On the other hand both ISPA UK and EuroISPA are representative and have
real support. We can bring sorely needed legitimacy to the gTLD MOU
and we can persuade others to do the same.
But there is a simple quid pro quo: if ISPA UK's 83+ members appoint
someone to represent their interests, we want the fact that that person
is speaking on behalf of 83+ organisations and their million+
customers to be recognised.
ISOC is a users group with 6000 or so members and 12 votes on the PAB.
Any one mid-size ISP in Europe has more customers that that and in your
scheme would be entitled to 1/83 of a vote. This makes no sense to us.
-- Jim Dixon Managing Director VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Member of Council President Internet Services Providers Association EuroISPA EEIG http://www.ispa.org.uk http://www.euroispa.org tel +44 171 976 0679 tel +32 2 503 22 65
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:22 PST