Dear Vlad, dear all, It is OK for ETSI. Azucena At 18:10 19/10/01 +0200, Androuchko, Vladimir wrote: >Dear Protocol Council Members, >Please find below the Draft reply to Mrs. D. Michel concerning PSO-PC >Comments to the ALSC Draft Report on the At-Large Mebership for your >consideration. >Please, give me your guidelines, concerning the comments from other >supporting organizations, if any. >Thank you very much. >Best regards, >Vlad >P.S. Sorry for reminding you, the deadline for comments to be sent is 26 >October. > > >*********************** >Dear Mrs. Michel, > >On behalf of the Protocol Council I would like to inform you on the >following: > > The PSO PC has not reached consensus on comments to the ALSC document. >Each of the 4 members of the PSO have prepared their own comments as >follows: > >- Comments from IETF > >- Comments from ETSI to the ALSC Draft Report on ICANN At-Large Membership >Date: 16-10-01 > > >ETSI has analysed the comprehensive document drafted by the ALSC. > > > >Firstly, ETSI wants to notify that no part of the above referenced > >document has a direct impact on technical issues neither for the Internet > >Protocol nor for the operation of the Internet. Potential indirect impact > >is clearly identified in our comments. > > > >Some of the content of the ALSC document has an impact on the structure of > >ICANN and therefore affects the PSO as ICANN Supporting Organization and > >the comments contained herein are presented under this view. > > > >¨ ETSI supports the creation of an At Large Supporting Organization > >to channel the involvement of At Large in the ICANN structure as it is in > >line with the approach followed to set up the other existing 3 SOs. > > >¨ ETSI advices caution and care in the implementation of the proposed > >ALSO membership restricted to "those individuals holding a domain name". > >While the ALSC has clearly examined the technical requirements and > >potential for abuse in e-mail based ALSO registration, we nevertheless > >observe that any choice to allow direct voting by the At Large members, 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. > > >¨ ETSI expresses concern for the technical implications in the DNS of > >the need to hold a domain name in order to get At Large voting rights. > >This choice could lead to the creation of more registrations that are not > >tied up to functioning domains. The technical purpose of the DNS is > >mapping from names to hosts. There is no evidence that the, somehow > >artificial, increase of second level domain names within the DNS tree > >would not create technical problems. > > >¨ Furthermore, ETSI considers that it would be beneficial for the > >Internet community to allow other means to become "At Large member" such > >as being an individual member of a national, regional or international > >recognised User Association not linked to commercial businesses. This > >alternative will not bring the undesirable side effects of the one linked > >to the domain name registration. > > >¨ As for the number of seats in the ICANN Board that this proposed > >new Supporting Organization should have, ETSI considers that it should be > >identical to those assigned to the other ICANN SOs (presently 3 seats per > >SO, further reconsideration of this number is acceptable). No value added > >is identified for increasing the number of seats for any of the SOs > >(including the proposed ALSO) as those individuals elected would hold, > >anyhow, the representation of the whole SO. The overhead cost associated > >with an increase of the ICANN Board seats should be carefully considered. > > >¨ Also, ETSI believes that 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. > > >¨ Regarding the duration of the terms of office of the ICANN Board > >members representing the ALSO, ETSI supports an identical model to the one > >followed so far by the existing 3 SOs. > > >¨ ETSI supports the target of having this new ALSO self-funded, > >self-organising and transparent, the way the PSO is. Initial funds and > >outreach from ICANN to start up the process is acceptable. > > >¨ ETSI supports the proposal made in the document of increasing the > >relationship and exchange of views between the ICANN Supporting > >Organizations, including the proposed new one, the ALSO. > > > >- Comments from ITU (to be provided by Brian and Fabio) > >- Comments from W3C (to be provided by Philippe) *************************************************** Azucena Hernandez Telefonica Desarrollo de Red Tel: +34 91 5846842 Fax: +34 915846843 GSM: +34 609425506 e-mail: azucena.hernandez@telefonica.es ***************************************************