[discuss] A thought experiment - what follows the 'IANA transition?'
Barry Shein
bzs at world.std.com
Thu Mar 20 03:12:49 UTC 2014
On March 19, 2014 at 07:51 pindar.wong at gmail.com (Pindar Wong) wrote:
> Hi Barry
>
> It's been a long while...and thanks for this hub-spoke thought piece. Two
> quick questions:-
Great to hear from you Pindar!
>
> 1) Would this model prohibit the 'relatively autonomous' spokes forming
> inter-spoke relationships if necessary i.e. moving from pure Hub-Spoke ->
> Mesh (or would be it Hub-Spoke forevermore)?
The effectiveness of doing that would have to be governed by a charter
and by-laws. I don't see why it would be prohibited though there might
be a need for boundaries.
This also brings to mind the parliamentary idea of coalition parties
-- "coalition stakeholders"?
I suppose my immediate reaction is: Why not? One could extrapolate to
power asymmetries which might be counter-productive I suppose but at
some point that's the chance one takes in any voting regimen.
I don't see how one doesn't just view this as a natural part of the
process. Groups with common interests will coalesce on some issues,
this is how plurality and majority can be achieved.
> 2) Although you put it as TBD, when do you view your 'adjudication arm for
> settling any disputes' being established i.e. would there need to be
> procedural certainty beforehand or would there be a mechanism to evolve it
> as the form and nature of disputes emerge or are better understood?
I would hope it would be established right away since it's in the
beginning when there is little experience with the new structure that
fundamental disputes of interpretation are likely to arise.
> Tks.
And thank you.
> p.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Barry Shein <bzs at world.std.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > The immediate problem is one of trust: In the management, the
> > structure, in its lawfulness, and its ability and effectiveness in
> > representing and executing on global views.
> >
> > I would suggest that the current top layers of management at ICANN --
> > executive and board -- spin itself off into a global organization.
> >
> > Call that the hub.
> >
> > Everything else, GNSO, Registry/Registrar contract managment, DNSA,
> > GAC, etc -- the stakeholders -- each become relatively autonomous
> > spokes to that hub. Some or all of these will need some formalization
> > for their own executive and administrative management.
> >
> > The role of the new hub is to ensure the community interest,
> > accountability and transparency, manage a budget, and importantly to
> > administer a centralized assembly with specific powers -- call it a
> > general assembly -- of the spokes.
> >
> > The spokes choose hub board members and have input into approval of
> > the hub's executive management. Certain roles (e.g., chair) are
> > delegated to the board itself.
> >
> > WHAT DOES THIS ACCOMPLISH?
> >
> > You instantly have a top-tier organization which has been globalized
> > but is recognized as being capable of performing the executive and
> > administrative functions.
> >
> > It's the same people we all know on day one just reorganized a little
> > into a more globally responsive structure.
> >
> > There is no immediate need for agonizing over choosing some new
> > top-level hierarchy (i.e., people, process.)
> >
> > That can occur evolutionarily within the re-org structure.
> >
> > This General Assembly (spokes) can add new spokes (stakeholder groups)
> > as needed by some typical voting regimen with the hub attending to
> > issues of adherence to by-laws, budget, transparency, etc.
> >
> > A major missing piece (TBD) is an adjudication arm for settling any
> > disputes between the hub and spokes which seem to come down to
> > disagreement over interpretation of by-laws and precedent (i.e., can't
> > simply be resolved by a vote, for example "can we vote on XYZ???"),
> > whether process was properly followed, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > P.S. Whenver I see "DNSA" I can't help but think distributed-NSA but
> > perhaps that's my technical side :-)
> >
> > --
> > -Barry Shein
> >
> > The World | bzs at TheWorld.com |
> > http://www.TheWorld.com
> > Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR,
> > Canada
> > Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list
> > discuss at 1net.org
> > http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> <div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra">Hi Barry<br><br>It's been a long while...and thanks for this hub-spoke thought piece. Two quick questions:-<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">1) Would this model prohibit the 'relatively autonomous' spokes forming inter-spoke relationships if necessary i.e. moving from pure Hub-Spoke -> Mesh (or would be it Hub-Spoke forevermore)?<br>
> <br></div><div class="gmail_extra">2) Although you put it as TBD, when do you view your 'adjudication arm for settling any disputes' being established i.e. would there need to be procedural certainty beforehand or would there be a mechanism to evolve it as the form and nature of disputes emerge or are better understood?<br>
> <br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Tks.<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">p.<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">
> <div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Barry Shein <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bzs at world.std.com" target="_blank">bzs at world.std.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
> <br>
> The immediate problem is one of trust: In the management, the<br>
> structure, in its lawfulness, and its ability and effectiveness in<br>
> representing and executing on global views.<br>
> <br>
> I would suggest that the current top layers of management at ICANN --<br>
> executive and board -- spin itself off into a global organization.<br>
> <br>
> Call that the hub.<br>
> <br>
> Everything else, GNSO, Registry/Registrar contract managment, DNSA,<br>
> GAC, etc -- the stakeholders -- each become relatively autonomous<br>
> spokes to that hub. Some or all of these will need some formalization<br>
> for their own executive and administrative management.<br>
> <br>
> The role of the new hub is to ensure the community interest,<br>
> accountability and transparency, manage a budget, and importantly to<br>
> administer a centralized assembly with specific powers -- call it a<br>
> general assembly -- of the spokes.<br>
> <br>
> The spokes choose hub board members and have input into approval of<br>
> the hub's executive management. Certain roles (e.g., chair) are<br>
> delegated to the board itself.<br>
> <br>
> WHAT DOES THIS ACCOMPLISH?<br>
> <br>
> You instantly have a top-tier organization which has been globalized<br>
> but is recognized as being capable of performing the executive and<br>
> administrative functions.<br>
> <br>
> It's the same people we all know on day one just reorganized a little<br>
> into a more globally responsive structure.<br>
> <br>
> There is no immediate need for agonizing over choosing some new<br>
> top-level hierarchy (i.e., people, process.)<br>
> <br>
> That can occur evolutionarily within the re-org structure.<br>
> <br>
> This General Assembly (spokes) can add new spokes (stakeholder groups)<br>
> as needed by some typical voting regimen with the hub attending to<br>
> issues of adherence to by-laws, budget, transparency, etc.<br>
> <br>
> A major missing piece (TBD) is an adjudication arm for settling any<br>
> disputes between the hub and spokes which seem to come down to<br>
> disagreement over interpretation of by-laws and precedent (i.e., can't<br>
> simply be resolved by a vote, for example "can we vote on XYZ???"),<br>
> whether process was properly followed, etc.<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> P.S. Whenver I see "DNSA" I can't help but think distributed-NSA but<br>
> perhaps that's my technical side :-)<br>
> <span class=""><font color="#888888"><br>
> --<br>
> -Barry Shein<br>
> <br>
> The World | bzs at TheWorld.com | <a href="http://www.TheWorld.com" target="_blank">http://www.TheWorld.com</a><br>
> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada<br>
> Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*<br>
> </font></span><div class=""><div class="h5"><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:discuss at 1net.org">discuss at 1net.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
> </div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
--
-Barry Shein
The World | bzs at TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
More information about the discuss
mailing list