[arin-ppml] Fw: Accusation of fundamental conflict ofinterest/IPaddress policy pitched directly to ICANN

[Mike Burns]

>Can you be more specific? The ICANN ASO? the ICANN BoT? the IANA?

Hi Tim,

Keep going, all the organizations above are suspect due to the fact that 
they are all comprised of the same basic group of  RIR designees.

I would take it to NTIA like DNS.

And I would use DNS as a template for the creation of the global policy 
restrictions John Curran asked about, which restrictions would apply to all 
registries, regional or commercial.
Just as all DNS registrars must meet certain qualifications, so would 
private registries of number space.

Let the NTIA hear arguments from the proposer and from the ASO, the ICANN 
BoT, and IANA, although I suspect they will all sound the same.

Regards,

Mike




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "McTim" <dogwallah at gmail.com>
To: "Mike Burns" <mike at nationwideinc.com>
Cc: "Keith W. Hare" <Keith at jcc.com>; <arin-ppml at arin.net>; "John Curran" 
<jcurran at arin.net>
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Accusation of fundamental conflict 
ofinterest/IPaddress policy pitched directly to ICANN


On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Mike Burns <mike at nationwideinc.com> wrote:
> Hi Keith,

<snip>
> But I feel the decision, informed by input from the RIRs through the NRO,
> should be made by the level above the RIRs and below US Dept. of Commerce.

Can you be more specific? The ICANN ASO? the ICANN BoT? the IANA?

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel