July 2006 - ispcp - lists.icann.org

A proposal
by Mark McFadden July 28, 2006

July 28, 2006

ISPCP Members: I would like to make a small proposal. I would suggest that we make a donation, on behalf of all members of the ISPCP, to the Liz Dengate Thrush Internet Entrepreneurship Foundation. Our budget can currently support such a donation and many of our members have been touched and influenced by the work of Peter and Liz. We share in Peter's recent tragedy and I think a donation of $100 USD would be a modest way to show our support and concern. May I have your support in this matter? The details of the Foundation are below. Liz Dengate Thrush Internet Entrepreneurship Foundation Objective: To award funding grants for use in practical educational advancement of individuals in Internet Entrepreneurship Reason: To assist in recognizing the progress made, and desire for further progress, by Liz Dengate Thrush, to improve the awareness and understanding of Internet technologies, and how to utilise the Internet for the improvement of education, entrepreneurship and engagement, with a particular emphasis in ameliorating digital divide issues Mark ISPCP Secretariat

2 1

ISPCP Comments to the ICANN President's Committee on Strategy
by Mark McFadden July 19, 2006

July 19, 2006

All: I have also copied the ICANN President's Committee on Strategy on our US Department of Commerce MoU Inquiry comments. I thought that the committee would find our input useful as they considered input for strategic planning in ICANN. Mark Mark McFadden ISPCP Secretariat

1 0

Comments regarding docket No. 060519136-6136-01
by Mark McFadden July 19, 2006

July 19, 2006

The Internet Service Provider and Connectivity Provider constituency within the generic Names Supporting Organization is please to send the attached comments in the matter of: * *National Telecommunications and Information Administration Docket No. 060519136-6136-01 The Continued Transition of the Technical Coordination and Management of the Internet Domain Name and Addressing System On behalf of the ISPCP, Mark McFadden ISPCP Secretariat ispcp-activity(a)mcfaddencentral.com* *

1 0

NEW VERSION - ISPCP Draft Comments on US Government ICANN MoU Inquiry
by Mark McFadden July 17, 2006

July 17, 2006

All: Here is version 1.3 of the ISPCP Response to the Department of Commerce's Request for Comments on the ICANN MoU. Once again, I have attached it in Microsoft Word and PDF formats. Here are the substantial changes in the document: - I have incorporated Greg's suggested text about formalizing the administration of the root servers in section 2.5 (page 4); - I have changed the words "tragic attempt" to misguided attempt" in the discussion of weighted voting in section 2.4; - I have tried to clarify the goal of improving existing relationships with other related Internet organizations in some text in section 2.7; - After Tony's comment, I have removed the text related to the NRO in section 2.2 and 2.4; I'd be very happy to have further comments from the Constituency for a final draft. I'd like to send our comments to Commerce in the next 48 hours so please "Reply All" with comments as soon as you are able. mark Mark McFadden Secretariat ISPCP Constituency

4 4

RE: [ispcp] ISPCP Draft Comments on US Government ICANN MoU Inquiry
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com July 14, 2006

July 14, 2006

Greg I support your sentiments on the RS operations (I also like 'tragic attempt' but 'misguided' is far more diplomatic though not so explanatory, so suggest we make that change). I hope more comments will be forthcoming from others, or is Mark's draft so good that it's supported in its totality? If so - great job Mark! Tony -----Original Message----- From: owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Ruth Sent: 14 July 2006 14:35 To: mcfadden(a)21st-century-texts.com; ispcp(a)icann.org; olivier.muron(a)orange-ft.com; Yukari Takayama Subject: Re: [ispcp] ISPCP Draft Comments on US Government ICANN MoU Inquiry Mark (et al), I like your draft. We might replace "tragic attempt" with "misguided attempt" - although I can think of other, more juicy adjectives ;-) If we would like to comment on the unsatisfactory informality of current arrangements with root server operators, may I suggest something like the following: The current administration of the DNS root depends on distributed and redundant operation of the root name servers by a dozen independent organizations. Although this system's performance has been acceptable to date, it is remarkable that it is based entirely on informal agreements with the operators. This threatens to undermine the credibility of ICANN as a legitimate, responsible custodian of the DNS. The DNS has become vital to international electronic communication and commerce and the root is the lynchpin of the entire system. Surely more business-like arrangements are called for in order to ensure the stability and security of the DNS root in the future. If ICANN is to convince the international community that it is competent and worthy of the authority it bears, it must operate in a more professional fashion. Feel free to change this in any way you like to make it fit into the document. Comments? Greg __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

RE: [ispcp] ISPCP Draft Comments on US Government ICANN MoU Inquiry
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com July 14, 2006

July 14, 2006

Maggie Improving the existing relationships is indeed a continued goal, I think Mark's remarks refer to new relationships (currently outside of ICANN recognition). We need to clarify this. I have mixed views over the expansion of the SSAC, although recognition that on some particular security aspects ISP involvement would be helpful is potentially a good move. Regards Tony -----Original Message----- From: maggie.mansourkia(a)verizon.com [mailto:maggie.mansourkia@verizon.com] Sent: 14 July 2006 14:57 To: Holmes,AR,Tony,CXM R Cc: greg_ruth(a)yahoo.com; ispcp(a)icann.org; mcfadden(a)21st-century-texts.com; olivier.muron(a)orange-ft.com; owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org; yukari(a)nic.ad.jp Subject: RE: [ispcp] ISPCP Draft Comments on US Government ICANN MoU Inquiry I hope to send comments soon. I did want to check the group's pulse on the notion that no changes are necessary in the relationships with other groups? It seems to me that ICANN could benefit in working better (perhaps more formally?) with the IETF and other more "grown up" type groups? And do we think a larger SSAC to include ISP experts would be beneficial? Magnolia Mansourkia Chief Privacy Counsel Verizon Communications 703-351-3199 Voice 703-351-3653 Fax 202-744-3745 Mobile tony.ar.holmes(a)bt.com Sent by: owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org 07/14/2006 09:44 AM To greg_ruth(a)yahoo.com, mcfadden(a)21st-century-texts.com, ispcp(a)icann.org, olivier.muron(a)orange-ft.com, yukari(a)nic.ad.jp cc Subject RE: [ispcp] ISPCP Draft Comments on US Government ICANN MoU Inquiry Greg I support your sentiments on the RS operations (I also like 'tragic attempt' but 'misguided' is far more diplomatic though not so explanatory, so suggest we make that change). I hope more comments will be forthcoming from others, or is Mark's draft so good that it's supported in its totality? If so - great job Mark! Tony -----Original Message----- From: owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Ruth Sent: 14 July 2006 14:35 To: mcfadden(a)21st-century-texts.com; ispcp(a)icann.org; olivier.muron(a)orange-ft.com; Yukari Takayama Subject: Re: [ispcp] ISPCP Draft Comments on US Government ICANN MoU Inquiry Mark (et al), I like your draft. We might replace "tragic attempt" with "misguided attempt" - although I can think of other, more juicy adjectives ;-) If we would like to comment on the unsatisfactory informality of current arrangements with root server operators, may I suggest something like the following: The current administration of the DNS root depends on distributed and redundant operation of the root name servers by a dozen independent organizations. Although this system's performance has been acceptable to date, it is remarkable that it is based entirely on informal agreements with the operators. This threatens to undermine the credibility of ICANN as a legitimate, responsible custodian of the DNS. The DNS has become vital to international electronic communication and commerce and the root is the lynchpin of the entire system. Surely more business-like arrangements are called for in order to ensure the stability and security of the DNS root in the future. If ICANN is to convince the international community that it is competent and worthy of the authority it bears, it must operate in a more professional fashion. Feel free to change this in any way you like to make it fit into the document. Comments? Greg __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

ISPCP Draft Comments on US Government ICANN MoU Inquiry
by Mark McFadden July 14, 2006

July 14, 2006

All: I have made a first attempt at drafting an ISPCP response to the US Government's Request for Comments on the ICANN MoU. I'm attaching it for your review and comment in two formats: one as a MS Word document, and the other as a PDF file. The content of each is the same. As you may know the US Government continues to welcome comments in this matter. I hope you will have a chance to examine this draft and suggest changes, editing or deletions. I particularly welcome new text. I've tried to keep this draft short, but if you are interested in just seeing the highlights, simply read the bold and italicized parts of the responses to the questions. These sections state the ISPCP positions on the question topics. Once again, this is very much a draft. I look forward to your comments and additional suggestions for text changes. I intend to complete a final version and submit it to the US Government in the next week. On behalf of the ISPCP, Mark McFadden ISPCP Secretariat

2 1

Constituency meeting notes
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com July 10, 2006

July 10, 2006

Mark / All I have looked at the draft notes and offer some revisions in the attached file. In addition I've listed the actions from the meeting, if I've missed any please let me know. Mark - thanks for producing these. I suggest there is a final call for comments and then the notes are posted on the web site, along with the attendance list. Regards Tony -----Original Message----- From: owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark McFadden Sent: 28 June 2006 13:47 To: ispcp(a)icann.org Subject: [ispcp] Resend with attachments These are the draft minutes to the ISPCP meeting. I'm advised that my initial resend with the attachments did not get through. mark ISPCP Secretariat

2 1

RE: [ispcp] Note to ISOC members on the NTIA request for comments on the MoU
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com July 5, 2006

July 5, 2006

Greg/All I also support the views expressed by Greg. The Internet now forms a vital resource on which many of our economies are based, - time to do things on a professional basis rather than rely on the 'old boy' way of working before it all ends in tears. Tony -----Original Message----- From: owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark McFadden Sent: 05 July 2006 20:43 To: maggie.mansourkia(a)verizon.com Cc: Greg Ruth; ispcp(a)icann.org; owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [ispcp] Note to ISOC members on the NTIA request for comments on the MoU I'm drafting as we speak. mark maggie.mansourkia(a)verizon.com wrote: > > No apologies necessary. I totally agree. Did we decide to file > comments together on behalf of the ISPCP? > > Magnolia Mansourkia > Chief Privacy Counsel > Verizon Communications > 703-351-3199 Voice > 703-351-3653 Fax > 202-744-3745 Mobile > > > *Greg Ruth <greg_ruth(a)yahoo.com>* > Sent by: owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org > > 07/05/2006 01:09 PM > > > To > mcfadden(a)21st-century-texts.com, ispcp(a)icann.org > cc > > Subject > Re: [ispcp] Note to ISOC members on the NTIA request for comments on > the MoU > > > > > > > > > All, > Does anyone else have a problem with the statement > > "...operational authority over the DNS root name server > system through formal arrangements with the root name server operators > is not desirable. We believe that the current distributed and redundant > way of operating the root name servers by a dozen independent > organizations is highly successful." > > I think this Blanche DuBois strategy (depending on the kindness of > strangers) is rather ingenuous (or, perhaps, disingenuous). It > reflects the culture of the Internet about 20 years ago, when > everything was done informally by "gentleman's agreement" (sorry > Maggie). Things have changed. What's wrong with formal arrangements > with the root name server operators? > > Greg > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com >

1 0

Re: [ispcp] Note to ISOC members on the NTIA request for comments on the MoU
by Mark McFadden July 5, 2006

July 5, 2006

I'm drafting as we speak. mark maggie.mansourkia(a)verizon.com wrote: > > No apologies necessary. I totally agree. Did we decide to file > comments together on behalf of the ISPCP? > > Magnolia Mansourkia > Chief Privacy Counsel > Verizon Communications > 703-351-3199 Voice > 703-351-3653 Fax > 202-744-3745 Mobile > > > *Greg Ruth <greg_ruth(a)yahoo.com>* > Sent by: owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org > > 07/05/2006 01:09 PM > > > To > mcfadden(a)21st-century-texts.com, ispcp(a)icann.org > cc > > Subject > Re: [ispcp] Note to ISOC members on the NTIA request for comments on > the MoU > > > > > > > > > All, > Does anyone else have a problem with the statement > > "...operational authority over the DNS root name server > system through formal arrangements with the root name server operators > is not desirable. We believe that the current distributed and redundant > way of operating the root name servers by a dozen independent > organizations is highly successful." > > I think this Blanche DuBois strategy (depending on the kindness of > strangers) is rather ingenuous (or, perhaps, disingenuous). It > reflects the culture of the Internet about 20 years ago, when > everything was done informally by "gentleman's agreement" (sorry > Maggie). Things have changed. What's wrong with formal arrangements > with the root name server operators? > > Greg > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com >

1 0