Re: [ga] Fwd: LACTLD comments on Zone Transfers

[Jonathan Weinberg <weinberg@mail.msen.com>]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:
> Dear Jon,
> Could you elaborate more what do you mean by ICANN "to chose 
> to redelegate a ccTLD" ? Upon request ? By whom and to whom ?
> I am unaware of any elephant under the .DE bed, neither .AT
> nor .GR. They all operate for the benefit of their Local Internet
> Community, private and public sector alike (the public institutions
> including governmental ones are registered under .de, .at or .gr),
> and within their jurisdiction. 
> Could you be more explicit ?

Elisabeth -- 

	I meant to cast no aspersions on the three ccTLDs you mention, or
indeed on any ccTLDs.  My thought was simply this:  Part of the
longstanding debate over documents like the GAC principles has been the
fear that ICANN would support hostile redelegations of ccTLDs at the
behest of national governments.  To the extent that zone access would make
it easier for ICANN to do that, it seemed to me this was a quite important
matter, which people were choosing for diplomatic reasons not to discuss.  
I referred to it as an "elephant under the bed" because an elephant under
the bed is ostensibly hidden but nonetheless very difficult to ignore; it
seemed to me that this issue was much the same.

	Since I posted my message, though, David, Roberto, Steven and
Patricio have all pointed out that zone file access, by itself, won't be
enough to enable a hostile redelegation; the recipient of the file would
still be missing most of the registry data.  That's a good point; I should
have thought of that.  So the true connection between zone file access and
redelegation is only the more attenuated one that Roberto describes in his
message.

Jon


Jonathan Weinberg
weinberg@msen.com


--
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