The resolution adopting this policy asserts the following "facts":
And there's even more at the
"the Board has considered the public comments that were submitted to the forum"
[the Board] "determined that existing procedures adequately address
the issues that were raised
[N]o objection was raised by the Security and Stability Advisory Committee or other ICANN advisory bodies
There were four
comments made on this policy during its comment period. All of these
comments cited substantial concrete concerns about fundamental aspects of the
ICANN has never responded to any of these comments. There is no reason
to believe that ICANN's Board or any board member is even aware of those
I challenge ICANN to demonstrate that any board member ever read these
comments, much less considered them when making his or her decision on the IPv4
As for the board's assertion that "existing procedures adequately
address the issues that were raised". Hogwash. There is no
indication that the board or any of its members actually reached this conclusion
except by being led to it by the nose by "staff". And the
assertion is also factually incorrect. Not one of the concerns raised is
covered by any existing procedures.
And finally - as for objections by the so-called "Security and Stability Advisory Committee":
Because that committee operates in total secrecy how can anyone tell what that
committee says or does?