Michael,
This is precisely my opinion, which I have posted to a closed list (PAB),
and you have, breaking our trust, copied to the IFWP steering Committee. I
am copying back to PAB, the original list for this track.
I do respond for my opinions, though, independently of where they have been
posted. I feel free to share them with the group of which I am an elected
official (PAB) in our private list... or should I lie to them?
As long as Jim Dixon claims to represent EuroISPA, I understand that
EuroISPA (whom you also represent) is trying to use the IFWP to participate
in the incorporation of the New IANA... (which Jim has made very clear) and
I do not like to have my name used with that purpose, nor do many other
members of this SC.
Is this not the opinion or intention of EuroISPA? It would be nice to have
this point clarified.
In spite of respecting the decisions of the IFWP SC while I am a member, I
will continue posting my ideas in private lists and in private e-mail.
>I REALLY feel offended when I'm reading, that you are (on the PAB list)
>assuming, that everyone who is supporting the Berkman meeting is either to
>be identified with NSI or is following a hidden agenda.
I do believe that there is such agenda. That is why I have spent the last
month asking for things to be taken out of the meeting agendas after we had
agreed that they shouldn't be there... and for some reason they kept
appearing... and...
Jim has made no secret of his intentions.
This does not imply that everybody who votes for it is part of either game,
but most (in which I do NOT include you, nor some others) do have strong
interests.
> Moreover, you are
>characterizing the associations involved as "not mainstream" and supposing,
>that those of us - including me, of course - who are in favor of the
>ratification process as described, are not fair-minded, don't understand
>the structure of the IANA and are striving to dominate the nIANA, what is
>in your view the "death of the Internet".
I stand corrected about "mainstream organisations". A small amount of them
have voted for having such meeting. As I am copying PAB, I will not list them.
Death of the Internet, if you re-read below what I wrote to the PAB closed
list, refers to letting some people -who have no relation with the current
structure and work for their own private interests- be directors of IANA.
Javier
>
>Thank you very much.
>
>Michael
>
>At 09:44 27.08.98 +0000, Javier SOLA wrote:
>
>>My opinion is that the IFWP process has finished. It was born to figure out
>>points of consensus in the Internet Community, which would have to be
>>incorporated in the bylaws, which has been done by IANA.
>>
>>Nevertheles, there are strong economical interests (NSi and others) who
>>see that if IANA is in charge, they will have little chance of keeping
>>their revenue stream (NSi) or getting their own TLD
>>[names deleted]
>>So they are trying to organise a drafting meeting in Harvard in
>>which new IANA's bylaws will have to be discussed with NSi and others
>>[names deleted]
>>These people believe that if they are
>>able to incorporate IANA themselves, they will be able to make it as
>>directors of IANA (death of the internet....). Therefore they cannot let
>>IANA be the leader of the process.
>>
>>All these people have a lot of strength in the IFWP, mostly because very
>>few mainstream organisations are involved, so they have agreed on this
>>meeting and on a second "ratification meeting" in Boston right after (13th,
>>14th september), in which, I suppose, they will try to incorporate.
>>
>>They just don't realise that what empowers the IANA and the new IANA is the
>>trust of the root server operators, of the IETF, the IAB, etc.... Nobody
>>can create a corporation and decide that they are the new IANA, only IANA
>>can do that.. but there are some who do not want to believe it... they fill
>>figure it out on time, but meanwhile they sure make a lot of noise...
>>
>>What the endorsment of IANA does is to save time.
>>
>>Javier
>
>--
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Michael Schneider Chairman, eco - Electronic Commerce Forum e.V. |
> | Director, Regulation and Selfregulation EuroISPA |
> | Chairman, Complaint Commission of the German |
> | c/o Multimedia-Service-Providers Hotline |
> | Michael Schneider & Partners Law Firm, Phone: +49 2242 9270-0 |
> | Dickstrasse 35, D-53773 Hennef Michael.Schneider@Anwalt.DE |
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:34 PST