Bill, I know this issue is important and I know how concerned you and others are. This really is a ‘typing’ error I believe. I will see if we can get it fixed. Cheers, Chris
On 25 Jun 2015, at 05:51 , J. William Semich <bill@nunames.nu> wrote:
To the ccTLD Council Members:
.NU domain also objects to including any reference to ICP-1.
ICP-1 was never presented to and was never approved by the ccTLD community; instead, ICANN staff created it out of whole cloth (“fabricated it”) at its first meeting in 1999 in Berlin (where I served the ccTLD community as a member of ICANN's initial DNSO Council). There was no ccNSO at that time.
I still remember the meeting at which then-president Mike Roberts announced - with no warning to ccTLD managers - the imposition of ICP-1.
And I still remember Andrew McLaughlin, an up-and-coming young telecommunications lawyer with no experience in internet governance or in TLDs, whom Roberts had hired to be his staff assistant to ”oversee” ccTLDs.
At that meeting McLaughlin explained to ccTLD managers that from then on, ICANN would require that all ccTLD managers follow ICP-1, ICANN's “first Internet Coordination Policy."
And I also still remember how McLaughlin's attempted explanation - presenting ICP-1 as a "fait accompli" - resulted in a small riot among managers who attended the meeting, which ended abruptly when we all walked out of the meeting.
ICANN staff expected it could just come up with new policies, without consulting the community, and we would all just march in lockstep and obey, like good soldiers.
Not exactly what we had thought would happen when ccTLD managers agreed to participate in the White Paper process that created ICANN in 1998.
ICP-1 was never presented to the ccTLD community for consensus approval (in fact, ICANN staff repeatedly refused to present it for approval), and as such, ICP-1 has no basis for inclusion in any CWG Stewardship proposal.
I remind you that the ccTLD Community strongly rejected it when it was presented in 1999 at the Berlin meeting (with no warning or consultation) and posted on ICANN’s website, and despite our strong objections, ICANN staff stubbornly and repeatedly ignored the negative input from ccTLD managers, and AFAIK, no manager has ever expressed any support for it.
For many ccTLD managers who have been involved in this process since ICANN’s inception, ICP-1 was and still is a thorn in our side.
Please consider this strong objection from .NU domain in your deliberations on this matter.
Bill Semich .NU Domain Co-founder, ICANN Co-founder, ccNSO Co-founder and former Vice-Chair, APTLD Member, FOI-WG Former member, DNSO Council
On Jun 24, 2015, at 2:17 PM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> wrote:
Dear Council,
since I can't post to the Council List, and since I was on a DNSSEC panel in the morning and am about to go to the CCWG Working Session 2 I have not been able and will not be able to put my objection on the record against the retention of the reference(s) of ICP-1 in the CWG Stewardship proposal, which would be a show stopper for NA-NiC.
greetings, el
On 2015-06-24 14:55 , Bart Boswinkel wrote:
Dear all, Included the ccNSO Council agenda for today 24 June 2015.
[...]
*3. Support submission of the CWG-Stewardship Proposal to ICG*
[...] -- Dr Eberhard W Lisse Managing Director Namibian Network Information Centre (Pty) Ltd. PO Box 8421 Bachbrecht Namibia