Thank You David Schutt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for such a well thought out
and articulate statement. I want to add my endorseent to it.
Cheers...\Stef
>From your message Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:29:14 -0600:
}
}As an individual user and a commercial user of the Internet, I have grave
}concerns about the draft accreditation guidelines released Feb.8th 1999.
}These concerns go beyond a difference with any of the particular points in
}the document and more to the fundamental assumptions that underlie those
}points. This can best be illustrated by commenting on the principles listed
}as the basis for the draft.
}
}When the goal of the introduction of competition is compared to the
}principles as listed, some contradictions become apparent. Principle number
}5, referring to worldwide access and the development of alternative business
}models supports the goal of competition, but the others do not to varying
}degrees.
}
}Principle number one speaks to the relationship between registrars and the
}registry, and in the special case of the com, net and org registry it might
}be appropriate to put requirements in place that otherwise would not be
}necessary. Giving the system a new start, with a level playing field, could
}benefit all concerned. Outside of this special situation, I can think of no
}reason why predetermining the relationship between a service provider and
}its resellers promotes market competition.
}
}Principles two, three, and four bear little resemblance to concepts that
}serve the goals implied by a competitive marketplace.
}
}The primary benefit of competition is choice, the opportunity to choose the
}type of service, and to negotiate the conditions under which that service is
}offered. If a handshake is good enough for me and the provider, and if the
}agreement is legal in the applicable jurisdictions, what benefit is provided
}by mandating a specific type of agreement? What common good is served? The
}language in principle two sounds somewhat like consumer protection, but in a
}situation where there really isn't yet a functioning market, how is it
}possible to predict what is likely to produce abuse of customers and what is
}not? At best it is guesswork, and unintended consequences are likely to
}overwhelm any benefits.
}
}As to principle three, the registration agreement should be legal in the
}applicable jurisdictions. This is what protects the rights of the parties to
}the agreement, and the legal systems of the world are what defines and
}protects the rights of third parties. Legal systems vary according to
}history and culture, and where there is necessity of and agreement on
}harmonization of law, this is reflected in arrangements between governments.
}ICANN is not a legislature or a court, and it has no mandate to behave as a
}government. Especially one that attempts to define legal rights and apply
}them worldwide.
}
}Privacy and the protection of data are important issues, but once again,
}they are best served by having available a wide variety of choices that can
}be selected to meet the individual situation and need. As a private
}individual, I would prefer to deal with a service provider that holds
}information about me in the strictest of confidence. As a business person,
}using the Internet for business purposes, my desires are different. It is in
}my interest to have information about my business as easily available and as
}widely disseminated as possible. Other organizations, such as network
}infrastructure operators, may wish to have detailed information only
}available to their peers. Again, the best way to serve these diverse needs
}is to allow a variety of approaches to develop, tailored to the needs
}expressed by individual customers. Making blanket statements about what data
}should and should not be required with domain registration serves everyone
}poorly.
}
}Even though the guidelines start out by talking about introducing
}competition into the domain name system, that track is quickly lost.
}Competition is only desirable because of the benefits it brings. Competition
}can stimulate innovation and efficiency, but most importantly, in a properly
}functioning market it can increase the diversity and choice of services
}available. Most of the text of the principles consists of restrictions on
}the relationships between a service provider, its resellers, and its
}customers. The result of intruding into the relationship between a provider
}and a customer is exactly the opposite of what is expected from a healthy
}market. It results in less choice, not more.
}
}ICANN's role, first and foremost, is to preserve the cooperation and
}coordination that has made the Internet so successful. In terms of the DNS,
}this begins by protecting the integrity of the root server system. This is
}what is most important to the protection of Internet wide stability.
}Attempts to influence the system at levels other than the root run the risk
}of being extremely counterproductive. The more constrained the system, the
}more likely participants will be to move away from the center of
}coordination in order to satisfy their diverse needs.
}
}In these early stages of ICANNs development, it is vitally important that
}ICANN identify those measures that are strictly necessary in accomplishing
}its mission, and avoid the temptation of trying to address all of the
}desires that are expressed to it. This should be the overriding operating
}principle.
}
}Thank You
}
}David Schutt
}
