Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050225174438.03117db0@mail.club-internet.fr>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:06:30 +0100
To: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com>, ga@gnso.icann.org
From: "J-F C. (Jefsey)  Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>
Subject: Re: [ga] Reminder
In-Reply-To: <20050225044029.6397.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050225043249.02770a60@mail.club-internet.fr>
 <20050225044029.6397.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="=====================_50767139==.ALT"
Sender: owner-ga@gnso.icann.org
Precedence: bulk

--=====================_50767139==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 05:40 25/02/2005, Danny Younger wrote:
>Jefsey,
>My dedication is not to the ICANN cause; rather I am dedicated to whatever 
>entity can effectively keep governments at arm's length.  At the moment, 
>ICANN is the only institution that is so positioned to safeguard my 
>interest, so for now they get my support as well as my criticisms.  A 
>properly articulated Strategic Plan is important because it will detail 
>what we can expect in the post MOU environment.  If what we will be told 
>does not correlate well with our own vision for the future then we will 
>have to seek out or create new alternatives.  Either way, for now it 
>wouldn't hurt to offer ICANN some guidance.

This is what I mean when I say the ICANN cause. And I do not object you to 
try and us to help. But I saw nothing of interest in the ISP except self 
satisfaction on points I consider as detrimental to my interests and a 
bureaucratic growth. This is why I ask to list the pros of ICANN.

What you say is that ICANN keep goverments at arms's length. I can 
understand that desire from an American citizen in a country which signed 
an MoU with ICANN (the only one), where the Congress decides of SLDs (the 
only one), decides of whois, decide of the wheather and of the globe 
warming, etc. I tend to consider the French Gov the way the law voted by a 
democratic Parliament describes it, as the protection of the internet 
naming public service. Not perfect, but to know I expect the French Gov 
Army to protect me. I expect its other Agencies to serve (not to direct or 
harm) my own interests.

As the operator of my SNHN (small network, open network), which has the 
power and the bandwidth of the US international packet switch services 15 
years ago, I wish that Governments keep ICANN at arm's length as well.

As an SNHN operator (an @large) I miss a few features:
- a universal open naming space
- a fully multilingual naming space (not an internationalized 
spoofing/phishing cacoscripty)
- a free permanent IP address and the support of ISP/peering rotation
- no spam, spoof, phishing, etc.
- protection against DoS, drop in bandwidth, root server dysfunctions, 
privacy/intelligence protection
- sensible propositions against digital divide and e-colonization
- the direct interoperability, interintelligibility, interusability of a 
Multilingual Internet
- clear indications of the intended network evolution/innovation in the 
years to come
- sovereignty and security protection for my country, my porximities, my family
- a comprensive, updated, technical Internet book. You know what they have 
4000 RFCs :-) The motto is KISS !!!
- intelligent extended services (for.example: is ICANN discussing a world 
geologic alarm system?)

etc.
Let get real.
jfc






>
>
>"J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>Danny,
>I admire your dedication to the ICANN cause. The real thing is to know in
>what the ICANN has helped the Internet to develop (we can all quote many
>failures) and honestly evaluate if the pros beat the cons. The ISP (ICANN
>Strategic Plan) is only a way to describe what the ISP should says, then to
>say it as a description of the status quo, and then to describe an
>administrative growth to make it.
>
>I must say that I read the ISP. I must say I fall aslept several times. I
>was just dismayed. It could have been written in 10 pages. I may be wrong
>but I read it as "nothing new, except it more and more unnecessary
>bureaucracy".
>jfc
>
>
>
>
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. 
><http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=29917/*http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250>Learn 
>more.

--=====================_50767139==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
<body>
At 05:40 25/02/2005, Danny Younger wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Jefsey,<br>
My dedication is not to the ICANN cause; rather I am dedicated to
whatever entity can effectively keep governments at arm's length.&nbsp;
At the moment, ICANN is the only institution that is so positioned to
safeguard my interest, so for now they get my support as well as my
criticisms.&nbsp; A properly articulated Strategic Plan is important
because it will detail what we can expect in the post MOU
environment.&nbsp; If what we will be told does not correlate well with
our own vision for the future then we will have to seek out or create new
alternatives.&nbsp; Either way, for now it wouldn't hurt to offer ICANN
some guidance.</blockquote><br>
This is what I mean when I say the ICANN cause. And I do not object you
to try and us to help. But I saw nothing of interest in the ISP except
self satisfaction on points I consider as detrimental to my interests and
a bureaucratic growth. This is why I ask to list the pros of
ICANN.<br><br>
What you say is that ICANN keep goverments at arms's length. I can
understand that desire from an American citizen in a country which signed
an MoU with ICANN (the only one), where the Congress decides of SLDs (the
only one), decides of whois, decide of the wheather and of the globe
warming, etc. I tend to consider the French Gov the way the law voted by
a democratic Parliament describes it, as the protection of the internet
naming public service. Not perfect, but to know I expect the French Gov
Army to protect me. I expect its other Agencies to serve (not to direct
or harm) my own interests.<br><br>
As the operator of my SNHN (small network, open network), which has the
power and the bandwidth of the US international packet switch services 15
years ago, I wish that Governments keep ICANN at arm's length as
well.<br><br>
As an SNHN operator (an @large) I miss a few features:<br>
- a universal open naming space <br>
- a fully multilingual naming space (not an internationalized
spoofing/phishing cacoscripty)<br>
- a free permanent IP address and the support of ISP/peering
rotation<br>
- no spam, spoof, phishing, etc.<br>
- protection against DoS, drop in bandwidth, root server dysfunctions,
privacy/intelligence protection<br>
- sensible propositions against digital divide and e-colonization<br>
- the direct interoperability, interintelligibility, interusability of a
Multilingual Internet<br>
- clear indications of the intended network evolution/innovation in the
years to come<br>
- sovereignty and security protection for my country, my porximities, my
family<br>
- a comprensive, updated, technical Internet book. You know what they
have 4000 RFCs :-) The motto is KISS !!!<br>
- intelligent extended services (for.example: is ICANN discussing a world
geologic alarm system?)<br><br>
etc.<br>
Let get real.<br>
jfc<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">&nbsp;<br><br>
<b><i>&quot;J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin&quot;
&lt;jefsey@club-internet.fr&gt;</i></b> wrote:<br>

<dl>
<dd>Danny,<br>

<dd>I admire your dedication to the ICANN cause. The real thing is to
know in <br>

<dd>what the ICANN has helped the Internet to develop (we can all quote
many <br>

<dd>failures) and honestly evaluate if the pros beat the cons. The ISP
(ICANN <br>

<dd>Strategic Plan) is only a way to describe what the ISP should says,
then to <br>

<dd>say it as a description of the status quo, and then to describe an
<br>

<dd>administrative growth to make it.<br><br>

<dd>I must say that I read the ISP. I must say I fall aslept several
times. I <br>

<dd>was just dismayed. It could have been written in 10 pages. I may be
wrong <br>

<dd>but I read it as &quot;nothing new, except it more and more
unnecessary <br>

<dd>bureaucracy&quot;.<br>

<dd>jfc<br><br>
<br><br>

</dl><br>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
<a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=29917/*http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250">Learn
more.</a> </blockquote></body>
</html>

--=====================_50767139==.ALT--