[Chapter-delegates] [FYI] ISOC position on the ICANN JointProject Agreement

[Veni Markovski]

Patrick,
There are several BoT members here; can you, without revealing any
sensitive information, provide some feedback from your discussions,
and vice versa - inform the board about the current discussion?
I agree with your proposal - better not hava a letter sent than a bad letter.

Veni



On 2/8/08, Patrick Vande Walle <patrick at vande-walle.eu> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I agree with the views expressed that this was not discussed among the
> ISOC community and this is highly unfortunate.
>
> On the substance:
> > That needs to be elaborated & test-driven over the next year(s) in
> > order to be credible, to gain support, and before various
> > constituencies should be comfortable with ending the JPA.
> I think to the contrary that was has prevented ICANN from gaining a
> broader international support and credibility is precisely this one
> government oversight. As such, waiting another 18 months for the ending
> of the JPA will only undermine ICANN's efforts rather than sustaining
> them. Note it is factually incorrect to presume the ending of the JPA
> will end the USG oversight over ICANN. The root server agreement  will
> still be active and is possibly the most important tool.
> > (3) In the 2006 DoC proceedings, both ISOC and IAB strongly expressed
> > the need for all parties to recognize that the protocol parameter
> > function carried out by ICANN is on behalf of and performed fully
> > under the IETF's direction.
> This needs a tri-lateral discussion between ICANN, ISOC/IETF and NTIA to
> transfer that part where it belongs, ie the IETF, outside the current
> context.
> > If you do not agree with the formal ISOC position outlined above, I
> > would also encourage you to state that as well.
> Same here. Please make clear this is not a consensus position among the
> broader ISOC community.
> > Because of the short time remaining before the deadline for comments,
> > I don't think it will be possible to engage in discussion on the
> > chapter delegates' list.  But I look forward to meeting many of you at
> > ICANN and welcome any comments you may want to email me off list at
> > graham at isoc.org <mailto:graham at isoc.org>.
> I do  not think most of us are able to go to Delhi to discuss this with
> you. Hence, you will have to stand a discussion on this list anyway. If
> we cannot reach a consensus by the deadline, my advice is to simply
> refrain from submitting a comment, rather than expose our lack of consensus.
>
> Patrick
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>

-- 
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com