Re: Johnson, Farber, Maher and Cochetti

[Jay Fenello <Jay@Iperdome.com>]

Hi Karl,


At 02:48 PM 5/21/98 -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
>> >>http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/Johnson.htm
>
>1.) Isn't April 28 *after* March 23, the final, drop-dead, cut-off date
>for submissions to NTIA on this matter.?
>
>
>2.) While the comments are reasonable, 


I was especially impressed with the goals as stated 
in this document -- things like supporting an open 
and transparent process, initial jurisdiction under 
U.S. law, etc.  We have come a long way.


>Item #3 would give the voting power
>over domain name policy to those who hold lots and lots of domain names. 
>In other words, Procter and Gamble gets a vote for each of
>"underarms.com", etc, and those organizations which have horded up lots
>and lots of names get lots and lots of votes.  That is simply wrong. 
>
>In addition that policy penalizes those who have properly used the domain
>name system in a hierarchial manner rather than spreading their operations
>over a large number of top level domains.
>
>We should not support policies that encourage behaviours which do not
>scale well and could harm the operation of the network. 


Representation and control are the two issues that 
still need some work.  In fact, there is very little
in that document that addresses the evolution of the
new IANA, Inc., nor its relationship to the other
coordinated functions (technical standards, IP 
allocation and Root Server operations).

This concerns me greatly.

Secondly, I am also concerned that too much weight
is being given to domain name owners, especially if
the board is going to supervise the new IANA, Inc.

In a series of postings titled "Global Representation", 
I suggested balancing the interests of the Internet
users with those who manage the Internet infrastructure,
as represented by active IP assignments.

While I am certainly no expert in these matters, we
do have an extremely successful model that balances
the interests of the "public" with the interests of
the "propertied" -- it's known as the U.S. Constitution.

What model of governance is this document proposing?

I have more comments, but I'll save them for later.


Regards,

Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.  
404-250-3242  http://www.iperdome.com