Re: [ga] FW: Comment from the gTLD Registry Constituency

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 12:25:33 -0400, "Gomes, Chuck"
<cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:

>Elisabeth,
>
>I am sure you know I am not advocating that ccTLDs should use English to
>communicate with their constituencies.
>
>Moreover, to the extent that a ccTLD is restricted to a narrow geographical
>region (e.g., country), I am not suggesting that such a ccTLD would benefit
>from the same constituency structure as in the current DNSO.  But as you
>well know, a lot of ccTLD registries are not restricted to their own
>geographical region; they function essentially like gTLD registries on a
>global basis.  In those cases, I see little difference between ccTLDs and
>gTLDs because users expand beyond local boarders and associated policy
>issues are the pretty much the same.

This has been a long standing issue.  However no one has ever stated
who would decide and how they would decide which ccTLDs function as
gTLDs and which do not?  Any system other than self selection would
threaten sovereignty.

So perhaps all you need is a system where some ccTLDs could apply to
join the gNSO and be bound by it?
--
david@farrar.com
ICQ 29964527
--
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