Hi Roberto,
>... which may give another reason for ICANN using the ITU list.
>If there's an obligation to inform, and this task is delegated to the ITU,
>it seems reasonable that the contacted people be the one on ITU's list.
On the other hand, formation of the GAC is a
*really dumb* way of implementing the provision
that can be attributed to the inexperience of the
people involved - if this was a factor.
Participation by individual government representatives
as users (which is what is specified in the White Paper)
in existing supporting organizations, would have amply
met the requirements of Res. COM5/15. ICANN could even
have facilitated this by sending information to the ITU
General Secretariat for participation to its Members
There was nothing in the Resolution that called for a
special, autonomous intergovernmental body to be established
for this purpose based on the ITU PTT/telco regulatory Members
and that operated in secret. Ironically, if such a committee
had been established in the ITU itself, it would have been open
to participation of private-sector representatives.
--tony
