Subject: Re: [iucg] [governance] ICANN head warns against putting Internet

From: JFC Morfin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 23:11:09 +0200

At 13:51 28/05/2010, George Sadowsky wrote:
>JFC,
>This is an unhelpful comment.  First, I can't understand what you 
>are saying.  Second, I sense a high level of sarcasm that occludes 
>the meaning.  Third, it is devoid of constructive suggestions. There 
>is an old Quaker saying that I recommend to you.  "Don't speak 
>unless you can improve upon the quality of silence."

Dear George,

I chair the Projet.FRA for a French speaking space, a language that - 
as you certainly know - IDNA occludes the semantics. This may explain 
that I also found some typos in your "don't speak when eating your 
oatmeal cereals unless ICANN improves their QoS" commercial. I did 
enjoyed the pun: Quicker! ICANN the Quaker (netquake nimble survivor?)!

OK, after som fun, let's turn serious now. I am not here to help, but 
rather to negotiate.

Now, I must say without sarcasm, but with sadness, that this is a 
very helpful comment of yours. It explicitly documents that ICANN 
board members have not yet realized that "their" ICANN does not 
belong to the same world as the Internet Users' world and that they 
are not even trying anymore to understand what Users are saying when 
they contribute. In addition, they jump to negative conclusions and 
engage in unproductive reactions (something of which you did not get 
us used to).

In the Internet Users' world, technology comes first because it says 
whether things are possible or not in a network made of bandwidth, 
protocols, and machines. In ICANN's world, political beliefs come 
first and says whether the intellectual network of contracts, media 
releases, reports etc. is credible enough to support the stakeholders' agenda.

ICANN is obviously not nimble. However, Rod is. What he says is 
technically absurd. However, it is politically credible.

Up to now, politics and engineers went roughly along together because 
they made a couple that roughly shared a common knowledge of what the 
other one thinks the network is (cf. Karl's post).

I am afraid that this has definitely changed on January 7, 2010. On 
that day, the IESG approved IDNA2008, (1) under the pressure of Rod's 
press announcements - cf. WG/IDNABIS Chair (Vint Cerf)'s mails on 
this, and (2) after having considered what the Internet Users' 
resulting technical, adminance, and governance moves will be 
(http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-iucg-afra-reports-00.txt). In addition 
to technology and politics, use (and adminance, i.e. what decides on 
the possible use) is now a real component of Internet life.

Therefore,
- on the one hand, ICANN is pretending to test something that is by 
far not released yet and refuses to discuss the way that it could be 
worked out, even under its proposed "technical leadership" (?),
- on the another hand, the entire IETF process (IAB ongoing work, AD 
oppositions, regular IETF appeal procedure) definitely refuses to 
consider the ICANN moves as having any technical importance.
- and the rest of the body (users' use) has now been set technically 
free to go where it wants.

In this situation,

- ICANN staff and contributors have fully shown their inability to 
make the ICANN situation internally understood and to cooperate to 
reach a solution.
- IETF has to decide if usage architecture belongs to its scope or 
not: I do not expect to have a fully documented and digested IAB 
answer before the end of the year.
- Internet Users comprise three main general categories: (1) active 
users (this kind of governance lists) (2) end users (we never hear 
from them but they vote with their dollar bills), and (3) lead users 
who face and have to admin any new problems first. Lead users now 
have an architectural place in the Internet and a 
technological/governance empowerment capacity. This is not a couple 
anymore but rather a trio.
- The stakeholders at this stage are mostly Unicode/ISOC/Google led

ICANN actually faces the choice that Rod alludes to:

- either to ossify the de facto ISOCANN enhanced co-operation (UN 
support could help but would probably lead to politico/technical confusions),
- either be de facto replaced by the long planned DNSSEC oriented USG 
emanation
- or to be identified with a "nimble Rod" able to contribute with 
swift responses in negotiationsor power conflicts on behalf of the 
current stakeholders' IN class and USG's DNSSEC strategy.

IN Class commercial and DNSSEC political interests will resist rogue 
users wandering around for a certain time. IDNA, not. Nimble Rod's 
IDNA "make believe" action certainly is what currently protects ICANN 
in that area. The best for all strategy of which ICANN can follow is:

- to support Rod,
- make him informed so that he has a better command of the issue,
- make him negotiate the best way out/compromise in the interest of 
the IN Class, stakeholders' Group, and USG's DNSSEC strategy - before 
the Internet is shacked by the malignant uses of the IDNA2008 implied 
Internet architectural extensions.

ICANN's mistake was to unfairly favor a few IDNccTLDs over IDNgTLDs, 
and to not ensure that they themselves understand first as to what 
IDNA2008 really is.

>I regret that you chose not to provide a constructive response to my query.

As you saw, I did provide you and ICANN with a pair's response. The 
ball is now in your field. After several other board members, you 
will not be able to claim  I did not warn you. Anyway the Draft is 
public as if my IESG appeal 
(http://www.ietf.org/iesg/appeal/morfin-2010-03-10.pdf), the IESG 
response 
(http://www.ietf.org/iesg/appeal/response-to-morfin-2010-03-10.txt) 
and will be my IAB appeal in a few days and the IAB response.

Best.

jfc

>George
>
>
>
>At 11:33 AM +0200 5/28/10, JFC Morfin wrote:
>>At 16:37 27/05/2010, George Sadowsky wrote:
>>>Bertrand,
>>>
>>>Given Adam's comments below, perhaps you would be willing to 
>>>suggest some concrete areas in which ICANN could be more nimble 
>>>(or choose your own adjectives) while ensuring responsiveness to 
>>>community inputs.
>>
>>George,
>>
>>I am sorry, but no one could be more nimble than our current ICANN CEO!
>>
>>Nobody else, including IESG, IAB, WG/IDNABIS and its Chair (Vint 
>>Cerf), Application AD, etc. was aware that/how IDNA2008 can be 
>>tested by users. The real ICANN break-through is that  from Rod 
>>Beckstrom on, no technology is necessary anymore for the ICANNet to 
>>expand and offer new technical services.
>>
>>jfc