Re: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force

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

Chuck and all assembly members,


Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> gTLDs would like autonomy also.

  And to a degree, they can, and should, have it!  >;)

>
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: L Gallegos [mailto:jandl@jandl.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 4:00 PM
> To: roomkin@law.miami.edu; ga@dnso.org; Roberto Gaetano
> Subject: Re: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force
>
> On 31 Aug 2001, at 16:50, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>
> > Leah,
> >
> > >
> > >It seems that the ccTLDs are forming their own organizations that
> > >would actually be in a much better position to determine what is a
> > >valid ccTLD.  Things do not happen by themselves, but it just
> >
> > Do you *really* think that the ccTLDs would want to get into the
> > trouble of doing this? For instance, the trouble of deciding if there
> > should be a .ps, and who manages it. Don't you think that some of the
> > ccTLDs may take a position that will reflect the interest of their
> > respective governments, and that what should be a
> > technical/professional coordination among ccTLDs may turn out in a
> > mini-GAC?
> >
>
> As I said, I don't know what the ccTLDs would want.  My
> comments are simply suppositions and the recognition that their
> policies may be and very likely are different from ICANN's and
> many areas.  Being friendly to ICANN and supportive in some
> areas is a liklihood, I would think.  I also believe that autonomy is
> most important for them.
>
> > We might ask some of the ccTLD managers what they think. Peter?
>
> Precisely.  Isn't that the idea behind their SO activity?
>
> >
> > Anyway, by proposing to create an SO they have implicitely answered.
> > Were they thinking to phase out from ICANN, they would have left
> > instead of looking for a solution that will give them more influence
> > on ICANN.
>
> I believe they have left that as a possibility, but not the preferred
> action.
>
> >
> >
> > >seems logical that cc's should take care of themselves in this
> > >manner.  Entry of a new ccTLD should be up to those
> > >organizations as opposed to ICANN, IMO.  ICANN should simply
> > >perform the clerical entry of the information provided by the ccTLD
> > >organizations.  IOW, cooperate with them.  Let ICANN handle the TLDs
> > >they now control and let the ccTLDs remain autonomous.  I see no need
> > >for ICANN to micromanage them or force them to comply with policies
> > >that could very well go against their cultures and laws.
> > >
> > >Leah
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________ Get
> > your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> >
>
> --
> 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