Alas for this rosy vision, ICANN *tried* to boss the RIRs and get them to
sign contracts agreeing to pay it and obey it, but they balked. So all
credit to the RIRs - and none to ICANN - on this one.
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Monday, 01 December, 2003 07:24 -0500 "vinton g. cerf"
<vinton(_dot_)g(_dot_)cerf(_at_)mci(_dot_)com> wrote:
karl, ICANN has responsibility to do what it can to make sure
the DNS and ICANN root system work. It does not have to
disenfranchise the RIRs and the root servers to do this.
Vint,
I would go even further than this. One of the best actions
ICANN can take, IMO, is to look at a particular situation (and
the root system and DNS operations generally are probably good
examples) and say "yep, it is working" followed by some version
of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it... or even intervene". One
corollary to this is that not only does "it not have to
disenfranchise..." but that it arguably should not intervene in
those activities at all unless there is a strong case that they
are not working in some significant way.
In that sense, the observation that ICANN has not significantly
intervened in either the root system or with the address
registry environment should be judged as a success unless it is
argued that one or the other is seriously not working.
john
--
http://www.icannwatch.org Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin(_at_)law(_dot_)tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
-->It's warm here.<--