[AFRI-Discuss] [AfrICANN-discuss] Theme for a Joint Meeting
AFRALO/AfrICANN at ICANN 51
Dr Eberhard W Lisse
el at lisse.na
Sat Aug 30 12:12:09 SAST 2014
You don't get it, right?
It's not about "community". It is about individual entities.
What happens to your IPv4/6 addresses?
What happens to your domain name?
What impact does any/all of that have on your company's credit rating? Some of us do their books in accordance with GAAP or IFRS. Do we have to reflect any of this in our books?
"Community" does not address any of this.
And the joint letter to ICANN basically means that this process is dead in the water.
Remember, this not a process to transfer the IANA functions under ICANN's control, ICANN is the convener for the process to transfer the IANA functions to a multi stakeholder model.
Staff is not doing ICANN a favor by laying the groundwork to allow for legal challenges should ICANN get them.
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
> On Aug 30, 2014, at 10:05, Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack at gmail.com> wrote:
> Noted with thanks , i don't mean to water down the efforts of the different stakeholders, i was looking at it from a different angle that was hypothetical, that said i think Africa has something to offer some aspects of the transition touch on the ccTLD community making us interested parties in the IANA/NTIA transition and the least we can do is exchange views and give our opinion.
>> On Aug 30, 2014 9:44 AM, "Dr Eberhard W Lisse" <el at lisse.na> wrote:
>> This was written by parties that have or *ARE* invested in the ICANN
>> process, ie who have sxomething to loose from this power grab
>> Even if the only interest one has is being a PDP terms like
>> "Analysis Paralysis" do not make sense, and there is ABSIOULTELY
>> NOTHING Africa-specific in the transtion, this process at least
>> should lend itself so well to our usual logorrhea.
>> You should not even wait until October to endorse this. I do.
>> And so does ALAC.
>> On 2014-08-30, 08:05 , Barrack Otieno wrote:
>> > Many thanks Dr. Fuller,
>> > I have looked at the text and there is a lot of sense in so far as
>> > the issues raised by the stakeholders are concerned, they are well
>> > thought out and articulated, i was just looking at it from another
>> > perspective.
>> > Thank you for the quick turnaround.
>> > Regards
>> > On 8/30/14, Ben Fuller <abutiben at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Barrack,
>> >> Perhaps, but we should seriously consider joining all the other
>> >> communities. Scroll down to the bottom of the article where the
>> >> full text of the joint letter sent to ICANN is posted. We should
>> >> focus on that text.
>> >> Ben
>> >> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Barrack Otieno
>> >> <otieno.barrack at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> Hi Dr Fuller,
>> >>> You raise a very pertinent issue while i am in agreement with
>> >>> you, i also think we have to be wary of decisions that will over
>> >>> engineer decision making processes within ICANN since this could
>> >>> result in some analysis paralysis sort of scenario, what is your
>> >>> take?
>> >>> Just a thought.
>> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
>> el at lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
>> PO Box 8421 \ /
>> Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/
>> AfrICANN mailing list
>> AfrICANN at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the AfrICANN