Howdy,
This is what the IETF has to say about the ALSC report. As indicated,
it is set to be either a PSO position (if there is consensus) or
an IETF one.
Leslie.
=========8<============8<==============================8<====
The { IETF | PSO } has reviewed the ALSC report, and have the following
observations to offer:
(i) There are no technical issues, in the Internet protocol or
operations sense, in whether or not there is an at large
membership.
(ii) ICANN is structured around a careful balance between
technical and operational input. Decisions that change the
balance, on the Board or elsewhere, need to be considered very
carefully and examined for unintentional side effects.
(iii) While the ALSC has clearly examined the technical requirements
and potential for abuse in e-mail based ALSO registration,
we nevertheless observe that any at large effort, especially one
based on direct voting, is going to be subject to considerable problems
of authentication and certification (that the same person does not
appear multiple times). If the intent is to give the at large
effort sufficient voting leverage, efforts at capture are almost
inevitable. While the ALSC report concludes that this is a
problem for e-mail based voter registration, it is our opinion
that existing technical systems are not sufficient for precluding
the same behaviour in individual domain registration based
systems.
(iv) If ICANN at large voting "membership" is important, tying
it to second- or third-level domain name registrations could lead to
the creation of more registrations that are not tied to functioning
domains. It would then also tend to further flatten the tree.
Neither of these is desirable.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"The best laid plans
are written in pencil."
-- ThinkingCat
Leslie Daigle
leslie@thinkingcat.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------