[DNS] Fw: PAB Another NewCo Proposal to NTIA

[DNS] Fw: PAB Another NewCo Proposal to NTIA

From: Jim Stewart <jim§ttalk.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:25:06 +1000
FYI
Jim Stewart
*****************************************************************
Internet OldBoys - Australian Internet and Tech News
                        Weekly: http://202.180.226.8/ttalkra/IOB.ram
                        Daily: http://202.180.226.8/ttalkra/IOB_daily.ram

NetBoat - The worlds first netradio comedy serial
http://202.180.226.8/ttalkra/nb/nb.ram

http://www.ttalk.com
ICQ 7886979
mailto:jim&#167;ttalk.com 
*****************************************************************

-----Original Message-----
From: J. William Semich (NIC JWS7) <bsemich&#167;users.org>
To: pab&#167;gtld-mou.org <pab§gtld-mou.org>
Date: Friday, 9 October 1998 22:23
Subject: PAB Another NewCo Proposal to NTIA


>FYI, here is Proposal Number Four for a New Co to replace IANA,
>submitted to the US Government last night by Einer Stefferud....this
>copy came from the wwtld list.
>
>Bill Semich
>bsemich&#167;mail.nu
>.NU Domain
>http://whats.nu
>
>Original-From: "William X. Walsh" <william&#167;tjns.tj>
>Original-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 22:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>
>Today, the Open Root Server Confederation presented its proposal to
>Secretary Daley, as an alternative to the IANA Proposal. (I have pasted
>it below my own message)
>
>The ORSC Proposal and Bylaws take into account and incorporate much of
>what was done in the IFWP process, and the work of The Boston Group to
>date.
>
>We at the .TJ TLD have serious concerns over the current IANA Proposal,
>and ask that all ccTLD managers and organization review this alternative
>proposal as a serious option in this process, and to make your opinions
>and comments known.
>
>The US Gov White Paper called for a "Consensus" document, the IANA
>Proposal as it stands now has discarded much of what was done in the
>consensus gathering processes.  Does it still represent the interests of
>the broad base of stakeholders who hold an interest in this issue?
>
>Review the IANA Proposal, and the ORSC proposals, and any other
>proposals that are out there, and make sure your comments and
>impressions are heard.
>
>Consensus should not be reached by silence, and silence should not infer
>that a consensus has been reached.
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>William X. Walsh (WXW7/WW1506)   | TJ Network Services - The .TJ NIC
>Network Operations               | http://tjns.tj / http://nic.tj
>william&#167;tjns.tj / william§nic.tj | Domain Names/DNS/Email Services
>+1-(209)-493-6144                | 
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>Personal Opinions Only
>Date: 08-Oct-98 / Time: 22:47:30
>
>
>
>-----FW: <17009.907910425&#167;nma.com>-----
>
>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 22:20:25 -0700
>Sender: owner-domain-policy&#167;open-rsc.org
>From: Einar Stefferud <stef&#167;nma.com>
>To: dnspolicy&#167;ntia.doc.gov
>Subject: ORSC proposal to NTIA for Management of Internet Names and
>Addresses
>Cc: (for The Hon William M Daley) <krose&#167;ntia.doc.gov>,
>webmaster&#167;ntia.doc.gov,
> domain-policy&#167;open-rsc.org, Ruediger Grimm <grimm§darmstadt.gmd.de>
>
>                              October 8, 1998
>
>
>
>Honorable William M. Daley
>Secretary of Commerce
> c/o Karen Rose
>Office of International Affairs
>Room 471
>National Telecommunications and
>   Information Administration
>United States Department of Commerce
>14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W.
>Washington, D.C.  20230
>
>
>         Re:  Management of Internet Names and Addresses
>
>
>Dear Secretary Daley:
>
>On June 5, 1998, the National Telecommunications and Information
>Administration ("NTIA") of the United States Department of Commerce
>issued a policy statement, commonly known as the "White Paper," in
>which NTIA called on private sector Internet stakeholders to form a
>not-for-profit corporation to administer policy for the Internet name
>and address system. Since that time, people all over the world have
>been working diligently to meet NTIA's challenge.
>
>While some may claim to have reached that goal, the members of the
>Open Root Server Confederation (Open-RSC) believe that the process has
>gone astray.  To highlight our concerns, we refer you to the press
>release issued June 5, 1998 titled "COMMERCE DEPARTMENT RELEASES
>POLICY STATEMENT ON THE INTERNET DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM."  In that
>release, Becky Burr said:
>
>" . . . the policy statement describes a process whereby a new,
>not-for-profit corporation formed by the private sector would assume
>various responsibilities for DNS administration that are now performed
>by or on behalf of the U.S. Government, or by third parties under
>agreements with the U.S. Government.  We invite Internet stakeholders
>from around the world to work together to form this new entity."
>
>She also said: "We are looking for a globally and functionally
>representative organization, operated on the basis of sound and
>transparent processes that protect against capture by self-interested
>factions, and that provides robust, professional management. The new
>entity's processes need to be fair, open, and pro-competitive. And the
>new entity needs to have a mechanism for evolving to reflect changes
>in the constituency of Internet stakeholders."
>
>In response to these comments, a sectorally and geographically diverse
>group of Internet stakeholders came together under the IFWP banner
>(The International Forum on the White Paper).  These stakeholders met
>at assorted venues throughout the world, and the result was a series
>of consensus points for the new corporation.
>
>Several weeks ago, the IFWP process broke down as many of the original
>supporters decided to negotiate directly with the IANA.  The result
>was the ICANN draft, a draft that is in our opinion, deficient in the
>following ways:
>
>  - The draft was finalized behind closed doors.
>
>  - The draft does not include many of the consensus points from the
>    IFWP process.
>
>  - The interim board suggested by the draft was presented without any
>    open nomination process or discussion.
>
>  - It fails to meet Ira Magaziner's mandate of accountability, as the
>    ICANN board is only accountable to itself.
>
>  - It fails to meet the terms as stated by Becky Burr, specifically
>    the desire for sound and transparent processes, protection against
>    capture, and fair, open and pro-competitive processes.
>
>The transfer of Internet assets and authority from the U.S. Government
>to this New Corporation represents a major departure for the private
>administration of a global resource.  And if we were only talking
>about Internet resources, the ICANN draft might be sufficient.  The
>truth of the matter is, however, that the New Corp will be making
>public policy decisions as well as administrative decisions.  Diverse
>issues like free speech, access, and privacy will all be affected by
>decision made by the New Corp.  It is for these reasons that Open Root
>Server Confederation, Inc. (Open-RSC) hereby and respectfully submits
>our proposal for the New Corp.  Our proposal is designed to be a peer
>proposal to the already submitted IANA/BGW/Haubens proposals to
>provide another point of view for NTIA consideration in the process of
>melding all the submitted proposals into a final result.
>
>Open Root Server Confederation, Inc., is an existing Delaware based,
>501c3 non-profit corporation.  We have recently developed Bylaws based
>on the IFWP consensus points as prepared by the Boston Working Group,
>and adding several additional clauses that build upon the IFWP
>consensus points to reflect the Internet community's response to the
>ICANN draft, and to reflect some long standing Open-RSC concepts to
>promote fairness and the use of open due processes.
>
>For example, Open-RSC has added a "fair hearing" process to give voice
>to all the parties who have suffered failed expectations during and
>before this White Paper process, up to the present time and including
>the MoU enrollment of CORE registrars.  Another group has suggested
>financial accountability clauses in relation to business planning,
>budgeting and fee structures, which we have adopted.
>
>We adopted Electronic Fronter Fondation (EFF) proposed clauses on
>recognition of individual rights including due process, personal
>privacy and human rights.  We also added a Membership article based on
>extensive discussions that occurred in the IFWP mailing list.  It is
>derived from a European proposal
>
>Enclosed by URL reference are documents reflecting these consensus
>points, including copies of the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws
>for this new non-profit organization.  These are:
>
>   Articles of incorporation at <http://www.open-rsc.org/inc/articles/>
>
>   Bylaws at <http://www.open-rsc.org/inc/bylaws/>
>
>   ORSC, Inc. Document root is at: <http://www.open-rsc.org/inc/>
>
>   **While the organization has been formally incorporated, and
>    it has a single temporary board member, it has not yet
>    elected a full interim board of directors or finalized its 
>    name or its Bylaws, and currently intends to refrain from 
>    doing so until the completion of your review of the enclosed
>    materials.  By then we expect an open process for selection 
>    of an Interim Board of Directors will be established and a 
>    new name will have been chosen for your chosen New Corp.
>
>In closing, the White Paper urged that the new corporation's
>organizers include "representatives of regional Internet number
>registries, Internet engineers and computer scientists, domain name
>registries, domain name registrars, commercial and noncommercial
>users, Internet service providers, international trademark holders and
>Internet experts highly respected throughout the international
>Internet community."
>
>Since our documents are based on the IFWP consensus points, and the
>IFWP process included all of these groups and more, we believe our
>documents to be closest to the goals as outlined by the White Paper.
>These final documents are the cumulative reflection of those efforts,
>and we believe that they do in fact command the support of a broad
>consensus of Internet stakeholders, private and public.
>
>                Respectfully submitted,
>
>
>                Einar Stefferud
>                Temporary Chairman of the Board of Directors
>                Open Root Server Confederation, Inc.
>                17301 Drey Lane
>                Huntington Beach, CA 92647-5615
>                +1 714 842-3711
>
>Enclosures
>
>cc (w/encs.):   Ira C. Magaziner
>                R.J. Beckwith Burr
>                webmaster&#167;ntia.doc.gov, domain-policy§open-rsc.org
>
>                                -- END --
>
>--------------End of forwarded message-------------------------
>
>
>
Received on Sat Oct 10 1998 - 05:23:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Aug 31 2014 - 08:00:07 UTC