On Mon, 29 Jun 1998, Kent Crispin wrote:
> Responding to the following text in the Discussion Draft:
>
> It is hard to imagine how the initial or transition Board can be
> established through formal election mechanisms. It is critical that
> the new entity be up and running sufficiently before September 30,
> 1998 so that it can undertake to manage, in conjunction with the
> Department of Commerce, the transition that is scheduled to take
> place at that time. Thus, this initial Board will almost inevitably
> have to be a true consensus group, arising out of the various
> meetings and discussions between the various interested
> stakeholders.
the point open and not "described" is the "initial interim board set up
mechanism" ! and/but i agree that it could/should be done by
"arising out of the various meetings and discussions between the various
interested stakeholders" but the "autority" to build this interim board
should remain by iana specialy if there is no "true consensus group/s"
> The ILF/IB has two tasks: 1) management of the Sept 30 transition,
> and 2) establishment of a representative governance framework.
>
> This requires essentially a Fiduciary or Trust relationship: The
> IB/ILF establishes and obtains certain authorities and powers, and
> control of certain intellectual and other kinds of property. The
> essential nature of task 1, then, is the *establishment* of these
> authorities, powers, and properties, in trust for a set of as yet
> undefined stakeholders. The essential nature of task 2 is precisely
> defining those stakeholders, and passing control of the various
> authorities, powers, and properties to them.
i think in this concepts the crucial thing is the mechanism for
interim board set up and establishing so its "autority"-by having as in
iana discussion proposal the "main players" in a gross way sorted out and
involved in building up the IB wich is the basis for seting up a interim
legal framework and "definitive" interim board
on the otherherside on wich basis you would to build the legal framework?
-shure there are principels already known and iana inchargt
but it would "look" much better to involv the main potential players in
the process of defining legal frame work for building the interim board
i agree with you complitely but i see there is a need for a close up in
the space ("missing link") between the now situation and the interim legal
frame work and interim board set up
who is defining the conditions for the interim legal frame work ?
-wich on itself could be the "basis" for the interim board
building/definition !
the iana ?- i have no problem with this !
but it would be nice if iana could find a way to incorporate as early
posible as much as posibel the potential main players into any further
step of ILF/IB-consensus building process
thanks
sascha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:32 PST