Folks, The archives of NANOG are riddled with complaints and comments about the lack of competent representation and influence for the networking community within the ICANN world. So this is your opportunity to make your voice heard through action that actually carries influence. And responsibility. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has just posted a call for recommendations and statements of interest for leadership positions on its Board of Directors and its Supporting Organizations. Additional detail are contained below. Note: the submission deadline is 15 June 2005. I encourage every one of you (the positions encompass almost all constituencies) to read the material below, and to consider who might be appropriate and strong candidates in each area for such submissions. If you have any suitable candidates in mind, please take action. Your participation is crucial to the direction that ICANN takes, and the decisions it makes. This is the step that can lead to significant changes. If you're interested in being considered, you can also submit a statement of interest directly. Please feel free to redistribute this message to any and all relevant individuals and groups. Rodney Joffe Member, 2005 Nominating Committee ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oOo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The ICANN Nominating Committee invites Recommendations and Statements of Interest from the community as it seeks qualified candidates for the following positions: - two members of the ICANN Board of Directors; - two members of the Council of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO); - one member of the Council of the Country-Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO); and - three members of the At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC). Those individuals selected by the Nominating Committee will have a unique opportunity to work with accomplished colleagues from around the globe, address intriguing technical coordination problems and related policy development challenges with diverse functional, cultural, and geographic dimensions, and gain valuable insights and experience from working across these boundaries of knowledge, responsibility and perspective. Additionally, those selected will gain the satisfaction of making a valuable public service contribution. Placing the broad public interest ahead of any particular interests, they will help ensure the stability and security of the Internet for critically important societal functions. These voluntary positions are not remunerated, although direct expenses incurred in the course of duty may be reimbursed. These positions may involve significant international travel, including personal presence at periodic ICANN meetings, as well as regular telephone and Internet communications. Candidates should be women and men with a high level of qualifications and experience with an international outlook including some familiarity with the Internet. They should be prepared to contribute to the collective decision-making process among ICANN's constituencies, supporting organizations and advisory bodies. Selection criteria, eligibility factors, roles of each position, application procedure, and contacts are posted at: http://www.icann.org/committees/nom-comm/formalcall-22apr05.htm Applications will be handled confidentially and should be received by 12:00 GMT on 15 June 2005 for full consideration. Selections will be made in October with service beginning in December 2005. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oOo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rodney, Can you compare the past out-reach exercises and the present one? You know, process and outcomes. I'm thinking of the process and outcome of the MITF exercise of 2002/3. It is now seven years since the issue of appropriation of tribal names was brought to the attention of the ICANN BoD in an ICANN VI-B(3)(b)(7) Constituency Application. The situation remains unchanged. On a personal note, I still recall then-CEO Michael Roberts telling me to just take what the IPC offered (nothing), as the ICANN bus was leaving the station. It is now six years since the issue of code point allocation by the iso3166 maintenance agency and indigenous governments was brought to the attention of the ICANN BoD in WG-C (draft-icann-dnso-wgc-naa-01.txt). The situation remains unchanged. The model of an sTLD was adopted, but sex.pro was not what we'd in mind. Had Jon not died, we might have had a solution along the lines of x.121 (and now ASO RIRs) regional DSO registries, or a .ps-like work-around. We going on the third year of .iq being dark, with no trust operator, and no contact initiated by ICANN with the Sponsoring Organization, still in a US pokey for an exports infraction (they freighted a PC to Malta, which the forwarding agent then sent to Lybia, and may have freighted a PC to Syria, about an hour's drive from Beruit). From Louis to the BoD @ Rome to Vint and Paul over the winter holidays, ICANN has been aware and the situation remains unchanged. The .ORG evaluation was rediculous. The evaluator was not independent or posses subject matter expertise. The .NET evaluation was rediculous. The evaluator ... ditto. The control of the DSO et seq by the IPC ("whois") is rediculous. The vanishing of the ISP Constituency (self-inflicted, but rational in the context, see the prior item) is rediculous. When I look at my years of non-accomplishment, and ICANN's years of little accomplishment, I don't see a lot a rational person could take a lot of pride in, or want to be associated with. Your milage may vary. You are correct that "[t]he archives of NANOG are riddled with complaints and comments about the lack of competent representation and influence for the networking community within ... ICANN." An alternative to asking for a new crop of possibly decorative worker bee candidates to self- or other-identify for a possibly decorative nomination and selection process is to identify one of more of those existing "complaints and comments" and attempt to act upon it or them. Beauty pagents and member pageout events aren't the same as working a task to a scheduled completion. Cheers, Eric P.S. If discussion of the latest ICANN process event does not belong on NANOG, does its announcement?
How about supporting alternatives to ICANN, which are getting more and more widespread and accepted like www.public-root.com and www.inaic.com ? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine" <brunner@nic-naa.net> To: "Rodney Joffe" <rjoffe@centergate.com> Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>; <brunner@nic-naa.net> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 8:12 AM Subject: Re: ICANN needs you!
Rodney,
Can you compare the past out-reach exercises and the present one? You know, process and outcomes.
I'm thinking of the process and outcome of the MITF exercise of 2002/3.
It is now seven years since the issue of appropriation of tribal names was brought to the attention of the ICANN BoD in an ICANN VI-B(3)(b)(7) Constituency Application. The situation remains unchanged. On a personal note, I still recall then-CEO Michael Roberts telling me to just take what the IPC offered (nothing), as the ICANN bus was leaving the station.
It is now six years since the issue of code point allocation by the iso3166 maintenance agency and indigenous governments was brought to the attention of the ICANN BoD in WG-C (draft-icann-dnso-wgc-naa-01.txt). The situation remains unchanged.
The model of an sTLD was adopted, but sex.pro was not what we'd in mind.
Had Jon not died, we might have had a solution along the lines of x.121 (and now ASO RIRs) regional DSO registries, or a .ps-like work-around.
We going on the third year of .iq being dark, with no trust operator, and no contact initiated by ICANN with the Sponsoring Organization, still in a US pokey for an exports infraction (they freighted a PC to Malta, which the forwarding agent then sent to Lybia, and may have freighted a PC to Syria, about an hour's drive from Beruit). From Louis to the BoD @ Rome to Vint and Paul over the winter holidays, ICANN has been aware and the situation remains unchanged.
The .ORG evaluation was rediculous. The evaluator was not independent or posses subject matter expertise.
The .NET evaluation was rediculous. The evaluator ... ditto.
The control of the DSO et seq by the IPC ("whois") is rediculous.
The vanishing of the ISP Constituency (self-inflicted, but rational in the context, see the prior item) is rediculous.
When I look at my years of non-accomplishment, and ICANN's years of little accomplishment, I don't see a lot a rational person could take a lot of pride in, or want to be associated with. Your milage may vary.
You are correct that "[t]he archives of NANOG are riddled with complaints and comments about the lack of competent representation and influence for the networking community within ... ICANN."
An alternative to asking for a new crop of possibly decorative worker bee candidates to self- or other-identify for a possibly decorative nomination and selection process is to identify one of more of those existing "complaints and comments" and attempt to act upon it or them.
Beauty pagents and member pageout events aren't the same as working a task to a scheduled completion.
Cheers, Eric
P.S. If discussion of the latest ICANN process event does not belong on NANOG, does its announcement?
participants (3)
-
Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
-
John Palmer (NANOG Acct)
-
Rodney Joffe