Capetown, ZA ICANN Meetings

Capetown, ZA ICANN Meetings

A photo from the ICANN Meetings in CapeTown

With Paul Twomey

Paul Twomey stopped to chat briefly and pose with me for a photo. I joked with him to get that smile going, that he would boost my market value if I had a photo with him. He countered, cleverly, that the photo would more likely boost his.

Either way, a good photo and a break from all the meetings for quick chats like this one are what make these meetings worth the long flights.


in my comments to the ICANN board yesterday I noted that Roberto Gaetano and I first met at the original CORE meetings in ’97/’98.

I was struck by the number of people who I first met back then that are
still well involved in the process. They include the following:

– Roberto Gaetano (ICANN board member)
– Hal Lubsen (CEO, Afilias)
– Ken Stubbs (GNSO council)
– Amadeu Abril i Abril (former board member, former gnso member, self-admitted ICANN groupie)
– Antony Van Couvering (founder NetNames, traveled to Tuvalu with me in ’98 in the early .tv fiasco)
– Bob Connely (registrar emiritus)
– John Kane (now with enom)
– Richard Lindsay (formerly of GMO)
– Nigel Roberts (Jersey ccTLD)
– Jonathan Robinson (NetBenefit)
– Tom Barrett (encirca and .pw)
– Dave Crocker (brandenburg)
– Kent Crispin (songbird)

I am sure I am missing others. Who else was there that is still involved?

hmmm……perhaps they can

let’s see. ombudsman, check. progress in the IANA function, check.
hearty new gtld discussion, check. a strong contribution from nomcom in
manning key ICANN posts, check (especially the addition of joi!). peaceful relations between ICANN and Verisign? well, four out of five isn’t bad.

I saw more clear signs of progress at this meeting then I have at any
other in all the years I have been attending these things. frank fowlie looks really promising as the new ombudsman. doug barton,
ex-yahoo dns geek, appears to be making real progress with the IANA
function. these two things have been constant laments from ICANN

the contribution of the nominating committee is especially interesting.
I had originally thought of the nominating committee as a bridge to
eventual direct elections. now I am not so sure. if the nominating
committee keeps stocking the pool with strong candidates that appear to
be quite likely to well represent the interests of internet users, not
business, not policy and not governments, then the need for direct
elections may be obviated.

bret, susan what do you think?