[arin-ppml] Fw: Accusation of fundamental conflict ofinterest/IPaddress policy pitched directly to ICANN
dogwallah at gmail.com
Mon May 2 16:06:32 EDT 2011
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Mike Burns <mike at nationwideinc.com> wrote:
>> 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.
The RIRs do not "designate" or appoint anyone to any of the above
bodies. The ASO AC members are elected by their respective RIR
communities. Those ASO AC members do have a role to play in choosing
2 (IIRC) of the ICANN Board. Neither the RIRs nor the ASO get to
choose IANA staff.
> I would take it to NTIA like DNS.
I think you overestimate the role of the NTIA in the 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.
Back in the 1990's, the idea was for the USG to divest itself (via
ICANN) of the naming and numbering roles. That process is still
ongoing, and one can see a certain acceleration of divestiture in
recent years. The Affirmation of Commitments is, I think, an example
As DF has indicated, this (asking the NTIA to make this kind of
determination) would be a real non-starter for the global Internet
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
More information about the ARIN-PPML