RE: [council] Item 2 NC agenda

["Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>]

I strongly support Peter's statement (with the exception of 
the implicit endorsement of sunrise). 

As I have stated before, name exclusions or reservations across
ALL tlds is a very blunt and crude policy instrument that is
fundamentally at odds with the nature of DNS protocol, which 
was designed to hierarchically delegate assignment authority. 

The best way for government to create "official" web sites
reflecting their views is within their country codes.

The sweeping rights in names created by such reservations
have no basis in any national or international law or treaty. 
The process of creating such reservations must go through
the DNSO at any rate, which is responsible for initiating 
domain name policy.

>>> "Peter de Blanc" <pdeblanc@usvi.net> 10/04/01 09:52AM >>>
I am opposed to this, especially the first paragraph which would totally
exclude the geographic names.
 
Once begun, there could be "mission creep".
 
If countries wish to register their names, that is, governments, let
them attempt to do so in the sunrise period, and make a case with WIPO.
 
This is an example of regulation which interferes with private business.
 
Finally, official sites in ccTLD gould be under .gov.xx  or .info
perhaps  .gov.xx.info
 
for example   Tokyo.gov.jp  or  Tokyo.gov.jp.info
 
Peter de Blanc

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@dnso.org [mailto:owner-council@dnso.org] On Behalf
Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 8:14 AM
To: NC (list)
Subject: [council] Item 2 NC agenda 


In preparation for item 2 - GAC statement in Montevideo of our meeting,
I would appreciate comments on the attached proposed response. If there
is support we can vote on this (or an amendment thereof) at the meeting.

 
 
Philip Sheppard
NC Chair