Re: [ga] Solemn public question to Peter de Blanc and ccTLD

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Peter and all assembly members,

Peter de Blanc wrote:

> Jefsey, and everyone:
>
> I am deeply concerned with the .pe situation. That is a personal
> concern. While I am the chair of the ccTLD AdCCom, I am NOT an executive
> decision maker for the ccTLD constituency. I do my best to facilitate
> consensus within my constituency, and to bring issues forward for their
> consideration.
>
> With all due respect, I am NOT going to answer your "Multiple Choice"
> questionnaire.

  I wonder why not?  Is there something in Jefseys questionnaire that is
disturbing
or potentially political reveling that might be troubling with your position
on the
NC?

>
>
> However, I will ask my colleagues to comment, on the ccTLD list, on this
> issue.

  Possibly you are waiting than to see which way the political wind blows
before you respond to Jefseys Questionnaire?  >;)

>
>
> Assuming there is sufficient interest, which I do, we will develop a
> position paper on this matter by the close of business in Montevideo.

  Why not before Montevideo?  Before Montevideo would seem to be
more appropriate...

>
>
> You are probably aware, Jefsewy, that the ccTLD (or wwTLD) is in the
> process of re-defining its relationship with ICANN.
>
> It would certainly be premature to attempt to answer some of your
> questions until this matter is resolved.

  Hummmm?  This seems to be rather odd.  It would seem that if the
wwwtld.org had a position of it's own, that your relationship wouldn't
matter...  ????

>
>
> Rest assured that these matters of mutual interest will undergo
> discussion, comment, and hopefully result in a unified consensus
> position from the ccTLD community.

  Uh huh?

>
>
> Peter de Blanc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Jefsey
> Morfin
> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 8:31 AM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: [ga] Solemn public question to Peter de Blanc
>
> we are all concerned by the IP lobby policy. Concerned but not doing
> muach.
>
> The result is that the Internet is going to be blocked into absurd,
> contradictory and complex situations that a few reasonable moves by some
> of
> us could avoid. In particular by ccTLDs.
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> this mail is to you as the elected, acknowledged, respected and
> undisputed
> Chair of the ccTLDs organizations.
>
> Today the new ".pe" ccTLD Manager is ... the Constitutional President of
>
> the Peruvian Republic and the ".pe" registry the Peruvian TM and IP
> Administration. To my knowledge this is - with Andorra - the second
> country
> in the world to decide that the color of the sky is green.
>
> This is in direct violation with the spirit of the RFC 1591
> <quote>
> In case of a dispute between domain name registrants as to the rights to
> a
> particular name, the registration authority shall have no role or
> responsibility other than to provide the contact information to both
> parties. The registration of a domain name does not have any Trademark
> status. It is up to the requestor to be sure he is not violating anyone
> else's Trademark.
> </unquote>
>
> This rises a question to you, so we know what we are to do.
>
> Peter, is your WWccTLD Alliance purely a registry association, whatever
> the
> registry management, or is it a ccTLD Manager association i.e. of
> organisations with legitimacy from and duties to their National Internet
>
> Communities?
>
> To get a simple and clear response what are the functions you include or
>
> not in the ccTLD Manager mission as a trustee of the National Internet
> Community (please just cross the appropriate responses):
>
> 1.  [ ] registry of the ISO 3166 TLD
> 2.  [ ] registry for other national, local, etc TLDs
> 3.  [ ] IP addresing delivery and management
> 4.  [ ] DNS servers management
> 5.  [ ] information of the National Internet Community, Gov. and
> national
> publics
> 6.  [ ] animation of the National Internet Community
> 7.  [ ] local defense of the National Internet Community
> 8.  [ ] organization/provision of additional services to the National
> Internet Community
> 9.  [ ] organization/provision of additional national services to the
> foreign users and communities
> 10.[ ] local defense of the Global Internet Community
> 11.[ ] international representation of the National Internet Community
> 12.[ ] common management of the Internet infrastructure as an associated
>
> Member of the ICANN
>
> Peter, Elisabeth, Oscar, Peter, Jean-Yves, Nigel, etc... if you do not
> intend to protect us but only to lock yourself into the ccSO getho until
>
> you die of grand age and lack of users, we have to organize ourself to
> represent the Internet Users and our National Communities. Otherwise no
> dialog will be made possible with the "Golden Block" (GIP, Staff, NSI,
> DoC,
> NSA). Your "ccTLD" business will either be repatriated to the US or
> becoming a public service used by only a few, to the benefit of the
> global
> US registries. And we will reach a point where the user consensus which
> makes the Internet will fade/blow away.
>
> Nicknaming he iCANN "AmerICANN" is not a joke. It just recalls an
> increasing unbalance and instability (the US DN and TLD are very
> technically poor as we see it through Cochetti's letter and
> disagreements
> over ".us"  RFP).
>
> Unbalance means further unstability and we all hate that.
>
> No one wants what one of us was fearing yesterday: that a European
> Representatives team starts proposing (irt ".kid" Act, Peruvian
> Resolucion
> Suprema, Chinese position) a European legislation to protect European
> Internet Industry interests against the AmerICANN's positions.
>
> Time has come to think about network stability rather than about posting
>
> limits and "current position" describing pertual policies about unique
> authoritative roots.
>
> Before we are commited to your "nuclear" arsenal.
>
> Jefsey
>
> --
> 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@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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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