Rob and all, Rob Raisch wrote: > Kent, > > While I appreciate your perspective (and realize the wealth of experience > from which it emanates), I believe it suffers from an understandable form of > establishmentarian myopia. THis seems both a reasonable evaluation and one that points out how we have all witnessed ICANN in its own establishment myopian decision practices which it in the beginning promised not to do without a broad stakeholder consensus which in truth it did and does not have with it's wide and sweeping decisions taken by it's Interim Board in Singapore with respect to the DNSO and Accreditation Policy. In this the ICANN process has shown it's flaws in all their splendor and revolution to the vast majority of Stakeholders much like the British did in the Boston Tea Party, which brought on the the American Revolution. Such seems to be the need now, but of course a revolution of a different kind entirely. > > > One thing I think most have realized in the last several years is that "the > Internet" has ceased to be something we technocrats can or should control; > it is being driven by the will of consumers and it is their power with which > we must contend and - if we can be clever - we must shape in the service of > a greater, stronger network. Very much true. The technology revolution does not stop it only continues as it has in this country for more than 200 years, so shall it be here, but that revolution must meet and provide for the needs of the Market place or like the many inventions will only be filings in the USPTO archives. Technology and its technocrats, such as myself can show the way, but consumers and the public must lead that way... > > > If there are valuable properties in the alt-root, ISPs will support it. > > If there is marketing value in being in the alt-root, companies will join > it. > > If those companies join, consumers will come. Two things you left out here Rob and I believe that Kent and those of the ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board are blind to.. If a market is perceived it will materialize.... If one is not there it will be created... If these two things were not true we would still be riding around in Buggies and buggy whips would still be in great demand... > > > I'll admit, this appears to be an insolvable problem, where each party must > be convinced to participate before others can join, but it is not, as anyone > who has negotiated a multi-party contract or built a commercial alliance > between multiple companies realizes. Each part must be played against the > other for any value to be realized. Such negotiations are delicate, yes, > but certainly not insolvable. Very true... > > > You state that "(t)he current root zone will remain *the* root zone for the > forseeable future" and I'm sure from your vantage this might be the case, > but I believe the market will choose otherwise, as can already be seen by > the ire evoked by ICANN and which would, I suspect, arise around any > apparently benign oligarchy. Yes. And any oligarchy or collective dictatorship, without the consent of the people it seeks to lord over, cannot stand in the evolutionary process, not to mention a revolutionary process. This has been the single biggest mistake of the ICANN "Initial" and Interim Board. The failure to install a open, transparent, and accountable membership in which all stakeholders are members of equal standing with the basis of the decision by which it will be effected by, the ICANN fails. It fails to meet the "Bottom-up" Stakeholder driven organization which the White Paper mandated it to be. > Not only is all such power precarious, rarely > serving the needs of those in who's service it was conjured, but "an honest > man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens." > As Jefferson so ably noted, such systems naturally tend towards corruption > and abuse. And we have already seen the first examples of that corruption and abuse stemming from the DNSO and Accreditation policy arbitrary decisions made in Singapore.... > > > As I have stated many times before, I believe what is needed is an open > collaboration where all can participate equally, built on market realities, > without arbitrary control by a powerful few. Absolutely correct. And this is precisely what the White paper mandated and the ICANN has NOT lived up to... > > > Such structures are possible, but they rarely emerge through processes of > slow, controlled evolution. Rather, they erupt by their own force of will > in bloody popular revolution. This is the real danger we face, and so far, > we have not managed it very well. > > I believe strongly we must manage these ever-increasing market pressures by > opening the root to equal and open competition, or we will surely see the > broken network we all fear. It is this flow of vital market forces we must > understand and exercise, not how to create yet another benign dictatorship. > "Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the > comprehension of the weak; and that it is doing God's service, when it is > violating all His laws." Well said and very true indeed!! > > > Finally, your contention that major governments must support such an effort > also seems lacking to me, since as we bend to market forces, so must any > government or be condemned a tyranny. Not only condemned to tyranny but dedicated to abuse and eventual failure. > > > -- > Robert Raisch, CTO - RivalWorks <http://www.raisch.com> > Out of memory-We wish to hold the whole sky-but we never will. Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact Number: 972-447-1894 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
