William Michael Cunningham williamcunningham840 at gmail.com
Fri Dec 8 04:22:14 UTC 2017

I see nothing in the bylaws which runs counter to my position. In point of
fact, in several places there is support for my inquiry, which is, by the
way, simply this: how might the newly revealed FCC AND policy impact DNS
security, stability and, most importantly, OPEN access, broadly defined.
The answer is certainly not that it will have no impact.

Further, I see nothing in the bylaws that gives added weight to years of
experience in any aspect of policy. If there is, please point it out. As a
"bottom up"  initiative, there should be a specific policy on this.

On Dec 7, 2017 10:42 PM, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

William, you are free to believe whatever you wish. But that does not
change what is written in ICANN's Bylaws. I quote:

Section 1.1. MISSION

(a) The mission of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
("ICANN") is to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's
unique identifier systems as described in this Section 1.1(a) (the
"Mission"). Specifically, ICANN:

    (i) Coordinates the allocation and assignment of names in the root zone
of the Domain Name System ("DNS") and coordinates the development and
implementation of policies concerning the registration of second-level
domain names in generic top-level domains ("gTLDs"). In this role, ICANN's
scope is to coordinate the development and implementation of policies:

        For which uniform or coordinated resolution is reasonably necessary
to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or
stability of the DNS including, with respect to gTLD registrars and
registries, policies in the areas described in Annex G-1 and Annex G-2; and
        That are developed through a bottom-up consensus-based
multistakeholder process and designed to ensure the stable and secure
operation of the Internet's unique names systems.

    The issues, policies, procedures, and principles addressed in Annex G-1
and Annex G-2 with respect to gTLD registrars and registries shall be
deemed to be within ICANN's Mission.

    (ii) Facilitates the coordination of the operation and evolution of the
DNS root name server system.

    (iii) Coordinates the allocation and assignment at the top-most level
of Internet Protocol numbers and Autonomous System numbers. In service of
its Mission, ICANN (A) provides registration services and open access for
global number registries as requested by the Internet Engineering Task
Force ("IETF") and the Regional Internet Registries ("RIRs") and (B)
facilitates the development of global number registry policies by the
affected community and other related tasks as agreed with the RIRs.

    (iv) Collaborates with other bodies as appropriate to provide
registries needed for the functioning of the Internet as specified by
Internet protocol standards development organizations. In service of its
Mission, ICANN's scope is to provide registration services and open access
for registries in the public domain requested by Internet protocol
development organizations.

(b) ICANN shall not act outside its Mission.

(c) ICANN shall not regulate (i.e., impose rules and restrictions on)
services that use the Internet's unique identifiers or the content that
such services carry or provide, outside the express scope of Section
1.1(a). For the avoidance of doubt, ICANN does not hold any governmentally
authorized regulatory authority.

"Secure and stable operation" *IS* one of the key phrases, but one cannot
ignore that words that come after it - "of the Internet's unique identifier
systems". We work within the overall Internet Governance System that
includes national laws and regulations. But we have responsibility for only
a small and very specific part of that.

Many of us passionately care about how well the Internet functions and how
accessible it is to our own communities and those of our colleagues around
the world. Despite you insinuations that we may be taking certain positions
for personal or corporate financial gain, many of us have spent DECADES
helping to further the goal of good, widely available, reliable and secure
Internet access and have done this with no hope or desire to personally
gain from our efforts.

Alan Greenberg

At 07/12/2017 06:39 PM, William Michael Cunningham wrote:

Even if I believed this incorporated the totality of the ICANN mission,
which I do not, "stable and secure" is the operative phrase. Removing nn at
the FCC is a destabilizing policy change, in much the same way that
removing glass steagal was destabilizing to the financial marketplace.

On Dec 7, 2017 6:32 PM, "Carlton Samuels" < carlton.samuels at gmail.com>
Just seeing this.  ICANN's remit is coordinating the Internet's unique
identifiers in furtherance of a stable and secure domain name system.
While interesting and even mildly entertaining, the FCC's NN malarkey is
decidedly outside the ICANN remit.
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:07 PM, William Michael Cunningham <
williamcunningham840 at gmail.com> wrote:
A reading of the FCC Net Neutrality order clearly reveals how impactful
this order will be on ICANN's stated mission and goals. A focus on
technical aspects of  the operation of the Internet's identifiers is
incorrect. Such a focus is simply too narrow, driven and suggested by a
small group of mainly non-minority individuals who appear to support the
financial interests of their group, and their group alone. This entirely
monetary focus is contrary to ICANN's desire to facilitate discussion by
all internet users in matters of national internet policy development.
Here are some other factors:
"Security and Stability"
"Diversity - income, gender race."
"Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice" Clearly, the order will
impact each of these areas separately and jointly.
I suggest a formal process for obtaining opinions from the At-large group
about perspective on the proposed FCC policy, not short circuiting
discussion by listening to the opinions of a small group of insiders.
In other words, why don't we ask people what they think, instead of telling
them that the FCC policy is irrelevant?
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:08 PM, William Michael Cunningham <
williamcunningham840 at gmail.com> wrote: Clearly, you have not looked at this
or the previous order and I have no interest in doing it for you. I'd also
suggest you look at the video of the prior net neutrality hearing under the
previous Chair. Since I was at that meeting, I can confirm that your
concerns were noted quite indelibly. On Dec 4, 2017 10:01 PM, "John R.
Levine" <johnl at iecc.com> wrote: Interesting. Suggest you look again.

Thanks for confirming that we have both looked at each of the 125
paragraphs of the FCC's recent order, as well as Appendices A and B, and
the statements of the various commissioners and we agree that there is
nothing affecting the operation of the Internet's identfiers that would be
relevant to ICANN. R's, John

Minority and Women-owned Company Small Business Financing Guide and
Workbook: https://www.minorityfinance.com/mfinform1.html
Twitter: @CreativeInv
My new book: The JOBS Act: Crowdfunding for Small Businesses and Startups

202-455-0430 <(202)%20455-0430>
"Evil is not driven out, but crowded out...through the expulsive power of
something good. " MLK
This communication (including all pages in this email and any attached
document) are for the sole use of the intended recipient and may contain
confidential information. Unauthorized use, distribution, disclosure or any
action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on this document is
prohibited, and may be unlawful.  By inadvertent disclosure of this
document Creative Investment Research, Inc. and William Michael Cunningham
do not waive confidentiality privilege with respect hereto. This
writing/publication is a creative work fully protected by all applicable
copyright laws, as well as by misappropriation, trade secret, unfair
competition and other applicable laws. No copyright is claimed in the text
of statutes, regulations, and any excerpts from others’ reports or
articles quoted within this work. Copyright©2017 by William Michael
Cunningham and Creative Investment Research, Inc. All rights reserved –
including the right to reproduce in wholle or in part in any form.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.
org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

At-Large mailing list
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20171207/8cc98b19/attachment.html>

More information about the At-Large mailing list