<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Saturday 27 February 2016 08:19 PM,
Lance Hinds wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+gUZcfempBGATUY=9K7Dvft4oSsmbXLMLp3cw_j4ZNyiL84qg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div style="white-space:pre-wrap">I am just curious as to the 'Non US location' where there is no risk of jurisdictional interference.
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Any relativity stable place will do , Geneva, Manila, Sao Paulo....
And basically, that only serves as a check to possible US abuse, and
normally with good checks in place abuses get avoided. That is their
primary purpose, and mostly checks need not actually get
activated... And of course if indeed we have to move to Geneva, or
Manila, or Sal Paulo.... there would be corresponding further checks
similarly... So the whole system is safer and more abuse proof
without us being dependent on the hoped for benign-ness of one
jurisdiction, of the US or any else... Does this make it clearer?<br>
<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+gUZcfempBGATUY=9K7Dvft4oSsmbXLMLp3cw_j4ZNyiL84qg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div style="white-space:pre-wrap">
Lance</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 10:42 AM parminder <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a></a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <font face="Verdana"> I
mean a check against abuse of power is a check only when
the potential abuser can feel it breathing down its
neck.... parminder </font><br>
</div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <br>
<div>On Saturday 27 February 2016 08:07 PM, parminder wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"> <font face="Verdana">Seun<br>
<br>
Firstly, there is huge difference between the one
authoritative root, and the 13 root zone servers, and
still more between these and their anycast instances...
These three kinds can simply not be spoken of in the
same breath. This is even more so when we are talking
about creating a fully ready redundant system for
immediate take over.<br>
<br>
Second, when a really effective check is being devised
against possible abuse of US state's jurisdictional
power (about which strangely no stress test ever gets
done - I mean in the oversight transition proposal
development process - when the real possibilities are
all around us) it can be effective only when the whole
parallel setup is fully ready and switch-able rather
quickly. The current configuration has little or no
value as the kind of check I am talking about.<br>
<br>
Now, whether we are at all interested in devising such a
check is an entirely different matter.. How meticulous
have we been in devising various other kinds of checks
during the transition proposal development process..
Then why such callousness with regard to this vital
check, which covers an area that, we all know, has been
perhaps the single biggest concern regarding the current
ICANN oversight mechanism, for most people, groups and
countries.... Frankly, I really do not understand it.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
</font><br>
<div>On Saturday 27 February 2016 07:26 PM, Seun Ojedeji
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos<br>
On 27 Feb 2016 12:22 p.m., "parminder" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a></a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> As a stop gap measure, before such incorporation
under international law can be worked out, a new ICANN
free from formal NTIA oversight should set up a
parallel redundant authoritative root in a non US
location, which is fully primed to work and take over
from the US based one the moment there is any
interference by the US state - whether its judicial,
legislative or executive branch, either in ICANN's
policy process, or actual entries in the authoritative
root. Since Internet's root system works by reputation
and 'community acceptance' and not by any necessary
physical components and linkages, this should be easy
to work out.. This IMHO would be the best interim
check on the US state's possibilities to interfere
with ICANN/ root file business.<br>
><br>
SO: At the moment there are root server replica across
the globe. Technically it implies that each of those
root can be potential authoritative root (if
absolutely required). So I don't think setting up a
redundant authoritative root outside US have any
significant advantage in that it's only authoritative
if active and not when redundant.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards</p>
<p dir="ltr">> parminder <br>
><br>
> On Friday 26 February 2016 09:31 PM, Karl
Auerbach wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On 2/26/16 12:55 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Karl makes a compelling case why ICANN
should not be a California corporation.<br>
>><br>
>> That was not my point at all.<br>
>><br>
>> One can go to pretty much any country, any
state, on the Earth and will find similar laws.<br>
>><br>
>> There will, of course, be variations in color
and texture among those laws. But no matter where,
when people pool their interests in a common
enterprise there will be the same questions of control
during times of agreement and times of disagreement.
From the 17th to the 20th century European ideas of
organization were spread around the world.<br>
>><br>
>> These laws have been polished through
centuries of experience. Those who think they have a
better idea often discover that that idea has occurred
before and was found wanting.<br>
>><br>
>> I am old enough to have come of age during
the "flower power" era of the 1960's. I saw (and
experienced) a lot of people and groups who rejected
"the establishment" and sought to reshape the world
along lines that were less confrontational, more
"personally empowered", more "love, peace, and good
vibes". Those attempts, like previous Utopian
movements, faded because they were based on
aspirations rather than recognition of hard lessons of
experience with human nature.<br>
>><br>
>> These proposals to restructure ICANN are
similarly aspirational. And similarly unrealistic.<br>
>><br>
>> Perhaps most unrealistic is the idea that "we
can just pick up and move to somewhere else".<br>
>><br>
>> The grass is not always greener on the other
side of the fence. And if one takes a look around
it's going to be hard to find a place that is more
amenable than California to innovated organizational
structures. Which is a good reason to look at what
the aging Hippies who now run California have put into
California's public-benefit/non-profit corporations
law with regard to membership and the powers of that
membership.<br>
>><br>
>> Don't fight the system. Use it. <br>
>><br>
>> --karl--<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>
_______________________________________________<br>
>> At-Large mailing list<br>
>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org"
target="_blank">At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large"
target="_blank">https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large</a><br>
>><br>
>> At-Large Official Site: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://atlarge.icann.org" target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://atlarge.icann.org">http://atlarge.icann.org</a></a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> At-Large mailing list<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org"
target="_blank">At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large"
target="_blank">https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large</a><br>
><br>
> At-Large Official Site: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://atlarge.icann.org" target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://atlarge.icann.org">http://atlarge.icann.org</a></a><br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
At-Large mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org"
target="_blank">At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large</a><br>
<br>
At-Large Official Site: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://atlarge.icann.org" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://atlarge.icann.org</a></blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>