Re: PAB Re: Consensus on "iana incorporation" competence/authority of "ifwp"?

Sascha Ignjatovic (
Sat, 4 Jul 1998 09:39:39 +0200 (MET DST)

i/we dont like ("ifwp")

-the name
-the origine and motive of it
-home page colors
-nonposibility to participate as individuum/small-organisation/company
-the false claims to represent this and that organisation
-the intention/statement that it is the main incorporator

*iana is that one!*
-never forget this!-

claiming to be the "main incorporator" is the main point of critics
instade to say "we are just one of groups we do our best and we accept
iana as the main consensus building incorporator"
they took to rolle of iana and propagate them self
as "iana independent" becouse they are going to "incorporate iana" ?

do you smell something ..?

"..pfuiii .. hier stinks something! what is it..?"

"We're going to succeed together or fail together with
----> this," said Barbara Dooley, executive director of the
she ? Commercial Internet Exchange Association and one of
the leader? the conference organizers.
"who" is cix
any/more/way ?
to be the But the meeting's hasty planning, done by volunteers in
"community" two weeks' time, has resulted in criticism from groups
and "niana" many people have been left out of event
"leader"? preparations.

"I'm extremely encouraged by the depth and breadth of
the people attending," said Jay Fenello, president of
Iperdome, a small Internet-services and
domain-name-registrar company. "But the way the
conference is being put together leaves a lot to be

Fenello and other critics on mailing lists dedicated to
domain-name policy have complained conference
organizers made too many decisions in private. "It's
very simple things. It's keeping people informed, even if
they don't have answers to questions," Fenello said.
"This does need to be an open process.

On Sat, 4 Jul 1998, Jay Fenello wrote:

> Sascha,
> You are objecting to a one paragraph summary of a six
> hour group discussion. Here are some subtleties:

by the way where are the informations about this meetings anymay ??

> This is only the first meeting in the IFWP process.
> More will follow. We have the EC meeting on the 7th,
> the INET meeting on the 24th and 25th, and the Asia/
> Pacific meeting on August 12th. We have various
> discussion lists that are all dedicated to these
> issues, including this one.

no problem with that
but a problem that this "ifwp is the umbrela" for all of this meetings !?

> Everyone who participates in *any* of these activities
> was defined as an IFWP participant! And that includes
> Kent Crispin, Dave Crocker, and Sascha Ignjatovic!

no way mr.crispin personaly and probably in his capacity as pab
chairman !-by the way whats with pab with gtld-mou.. not a word from ifwp
declares him self not represented in ifwp and me too NOT !

so why you are "defining" the ifwp as the
"allincluding" organisation than ?

ifwp is one of the organisaions-one of many but not the the "highest
suprime" organisation of wich we are "just parts of"

you should better forget this this will never work

> That's why we were able to get consensus on this item,
> otherwise the many CORE, ISOC, and International members
> of this working group would have objected. They didn't.



> Regards,
> Jay Fenello

it is nice that you are so unity-angaged and so good minded but
unfortunatly i can not accept your statement and offer that this
ifwp is the organisation wich will lead the incorporation of the new iana

it is one stakeholder but not "the summ of stakeholders"

thank God that iana is in the right hands of dr.postel who garants
that such "take overs" by "parts of the wholle" can not hapen !

> President, Iperdome, Inc.
> 404-250-3242
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> "None of us knows where all this is heading, but if we get
> it right, we have an opportunity that only comes once every
> couple of hundred years."
> -- Ira C. Magaziner

we exactly know where internet is heading mr.magaziner
dont wory
be happy :-)

thank you