RE: [ga] a quote from Lynn

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dear Steven,
I am afraid the AmerICANN has some positionning problem.
USA as you know have no USNIC. For a while the US traditional
generosity guested the international concerns, but as time flows
there are conflicts. Now we see progressivily the situation to
clarify and the ccTLDs will become obviously a smaller part
of the cake as new TLDs will come in.

.us is around. .eu is probably not a big ccTLD, but the European
thinking is developping about Internet management.

The urgency is now for ccTLD to forget a little bit about TLD and
to think more about NIC (National Internet Centers?) and how to
provide services, coherence, annimation to their users and local
TLDs, with the support of their local @large, ISPs, ASPs. Also
to join force wih local consumer representatives to develop an
Internet of proximity which will be their legitimacy... and their
protection vs. local government.  They should remember that
in a few months "experimental" inclusive TLDs and media may
have changed a lot of things about DNs and balance sheet.

We should all benefit from Lynn "oddities". "Global" TLDs is not
a today question at ccTLDs. The word is around. Lynn is a
new comer - so no historics - and he is at the core. His positions
are not necessarily adequate and his moves not necessarily
acceptable, but he reflects today's concerns ... or what is still
possible.

OK. His last document is illegal in here, as he quotes Ben's
awkward mails which a re public legal offence to privacy law,
and is a bylaw violation. But is that what is of importance
to you in NZ? IMHO what is of real importance is that Lynn's
document is so totally outdated that his only real argument is
wrong gossips about Leah's list. That is the point: the current
structures and solutions are aging.

The task was to provide a good *infrastructure* to the net. They
have worked on a pseudo governance *structure* instead. Well,
the infrastructure is drifting a little bit, making some earthquakes
in the structure.

Jefsey




On 00:11 11/07/01, Steven Heath said:
>Also quoting from ICANN follow up to new.net.
>
>As a ccTLD operator I have major concerns with this statement:
>
>"Today, there are only three global commercial TLDs in the authoritative
>root, all operated by a single registry operator. The four6 new global
>commercial additions (operated by four different registry operators)
>endorsed by ICANN represent a greater-than-100% increase in the number of
>global TLDs, and a 400% increase in the number of separate registry
>operators.7 If experience shows that these additions can be made without
>adverse effects - and there is every reason to hope that will be the case -
>then presumably additional TLDs can be established more quickly in the
>future should that prove desirable."
>
>The first line I feel is shocking in this clipping from
>http://www.icann.org/icp/icp-3-background/response-to-new.net-09jul01.htm
>
>It appears this is a formal attempt to reposition GENERIC TLDs as now being
>GLOBAL TLDs. This appears to be an attempt to under mine ccTLD's by making a
>ghetto for them and 'putting them in their place' by them being regional and
>not global.
>
>Last time I checked any gTLD or ccTLD can resolve anywhere in the world so
>what right does ICANN claim their are only _3_ commercial TLD's?
>
>Steven Heath
>Councillor, InternetNZ (.nz ccTLD Manager)
>--
>This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
>Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html