No. 4 !!! No Incorporation!
Here's why:
I originally thought that the most effective way to proceed was to spin the
IPv4 address, DNS, and protocol functions off into completely separate and
distinct organizations. I could not see a purpose of a single, central
organization other than as a convenient center for political manipulation.
Cooperation, when necessary, does not require a single center of authority.
This did not come to pass. We now have ICANN, a single organization with the
intent to become the center of authority in at least two of the three areas,
and possibly all three.
What is the purpose of completely separate and distinct advisory
organizations? Why not participate directly in the organization that is
seeking to be the final authority on the subject matter?
There are two immediate consequences to this. First, if it wishes, ICANN can
completely escape any responsibility that should accompany its authority. It
can lay responsibility on the DNSO for a decision, and focus discontent on
an organization that does not have the authority to implement its decisions!
Second, should a DNSO make decisions that prove to be unpopular with the
leadership of ICANN, ICANN has the ability to modify or outright ignore the
recommendations.
This is a recipe for disaster. Separate incorporation will guarantee
redundancy, inefficiency, and conflicts over the proper seat of authority.
Who benefits from a structure that would be designed to increase conflict
and confusion?
An even better question, what is the benefit to the ****DNSO**** of separate
incorporation?
I know of none.
David Schutt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Roberto Gaetano
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 12:23 PM
> To: 'DNSO open list'
> Subject: Incorporation or not?
>
>
> Folks,
>
> Now that the heat seems to drop, I would like to satisfy a curiosity of
> mine.
>
> How do we feel about DNSO to incorporate?
>
> IMHO, we have several types of possible positions, of which the
> following is
> an example.
>
> 1. I am completely in favour of incorporation
> 2. I feel likewarm about it, but I can live with it
> 3. I have no clue
> 4. I am completely against incorporation
>
> <snip>
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
