[governance] Comments related to the WGIG report

[Milton Mueller]

Ian, this is NOT a "minimalist" model. An open-ended GAC "right of veto"
is completely unacceptable. There must be very definite and limited
grounds for reversing or altering ICANN decisions on root zone file
changes. These should be more procedural than substantive, such as ICANN
not following its own rules for making changes, or some abuse of ICANN
process that led to an illegitimate change, etc. 

Wolfgang's comments on the routine technical nature of most root
changes should be taken very seriously. No need to politicize things
that are not already politicized. 

But even in his case, he implies that governmental actions regarding
the root can be based on content rather than procedure, which I find
unacceptable. Or perhaps. What exactly did you mean, Wolfgang, regarding
the " new gTLDs like .cat or .tibet or .basq or even .xxx."

Dr. Milton Mueller
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://www.digital-convergence.org
http://www.internetgovernance.org


>>> "Ian Peter" <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> 08/12/05 6:11 PM >>>
In a minimalist model a GAC right of veto on root zone file changes
(to
replace USG divine rights here) satisfies all needs? Wolfgang's
clarifications are important.


_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance