RE: [ga] .ct

["Rodrigo Orenday Serrato" <rorenday@banxico.org.mx>]

Professor Froomkin

As far as NIC-Mexico is concerned, the delegation made to it by SRINic dates
back to 1989, as stated in their website www.nic.mx

Atentamente, Regards
Rodrigo Orenday Serratos


-----Mensaje original-----
De: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]En nombre de Michael
Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law
Enviado el: Miercoles, 09 de Octubre de 2002 08:39 AM
Para: Roberto Gaetano
CC: info@domini-ct.org; ga@dnso.org; Amadeu@nominalia.com;
alf.hansen@uninett.no
Asunto: Re: [ga] .ct


This is a very helpful note.  Please could you clarify one thing for me,
though: when were the first ccTLD delegations?

In particular, were they before or after 1988?

AFAIK, fhe first reference to "IANA" is in December 1988, in Internet
Architecture Board, RFC 1083, IAB Official Protocol Standards 1, Internet
Engineering Task Force, at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1083.txt (Dec.
1988).

On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Ricard,
>
> This has been debated before, but it is probably easier to answer again
than
> point you to past discussions.
>
> Let's start from the original question, in your previous message
> (http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc11/msg00615.html)
> >
> >As our Ministry for Industry has not shown any great interest to date in
> >submitting the corresponding ISO application, we consider it necessary to
> >apply pressure through lobbying and the gathering of signatures and
support
> >through our website: www.domini-ct.org. Over the last six years, we have
> >collected 7.000 demonstrations of support from among individuals,
> >companies, institutions, and political parties from throughout the world.
> >
>
> Your Ministry for Industry is unfortunately right.
> If you check the purpose for ISO-3166, you will see that it is composed of
> sevral parts (see
> http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/a3ptnorm.html). The first
part,
> ISO-3166-1, contains, inter alia, the 2-char country codes used by ICANN
as
> the basis for the delegation of ccTLDs. ISO's current policy is not to add
> (please note the verb "add") to this list administrative subdivisions of
> countries: these are placed in ISO-3166-2 (see
> http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/devrel_2.html).
> So, CT will *not* be added to ISO-3166-1 by ISO, and the Ministry of
> Industry knows this. As for ISO-3166-2, Catalunya *is already* part of the
> list.
> Please note that the urls above are old ones, you can navigate on the new
> site of the ISO-3166/MA (the Maintenance Agency responsible for the
> maintenance of the ISO-3166 lists - see
> http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166ma/index.html).
>
> To your latest comments and questions:
> >
> >Our point of view, and also of many members of ISOC-CAT, is that ICANN
> >should not take desicions based on the ISO lists. We think that ICANN
> >should be independent of the interests of entities not directly related
> >with the net.
>
> >From what I know of ICANN, it will never take such critical decisions
with
> political impact, without basing the decisions on an officially recognized
> and authoritative source. ICANN did not get into the business of defining
> which is a country and which is not, you can imagining getting into the
> business of defining which part of a country is autonomous enough to get a
> specific ccTLD.
> *If* any authority other than ISO has to produce the list, this should be
> some kind of self-government body of the ccTLDs themselves (and please
note
> the stress on *if*).
>
> >
> >or the kurds, or the palestinians, or the lakotas. Why not? Where is the
> >problem? Would this to be a critical problem for the DNS?
>
> No, but it would be an enormous problem for ICANN, who all of a sudden
will
> have political responsibilities rather than technical coordination tasks.
> Speaking of the Palestinians, you might have noticed that .ps was
delegated
> only after its inclusion in ISO-3166-1. Please refer to
> http://www.iana.org/reports/ps-report-22mar00.htm, and note the
motivation,
> in particular the reference to the fact that when a previous attempt was
> made, PS was not (yet) in ISO-3166-1, and that fact was sufficient for
> refusal.
>
> >
> >>Or by each of the fifty states of the United States?
> >
> >Why not?  Have you an answer?
>
> Yes.
> US has decided to use subdivisions of .us.
>
> >
> >As I said in my first message, our way is a democratic parliament
> >representing 6 milion of european citizens. Five years ago, our
parliament
> >voted with unanimity a resolution to get the .ct domain, from comunists
to
> >liberalists.
>
> You might also vote with unanimity a resolution to get the sun to rise
from
> west, but it does not necessarily follow that the sun will recognise the
> consensus, and obey the resolution. Same for ISO and IANA.
>
> >
> >But... can you answer those questions?:
> >Why US minor islands (.um), Ascension  Island (.ac), Guernsey (.gg), Isle
> >of Man (.im) and Jersey (.je) and others has a ccTLD and are not ISO3166
> >standards?
> You might want to have a closer look at ISO-3166-1. There is also a
> so-called "reserved list", that contains mostly islands that are separated
> for the mainland territory (incidentally, IC is reserved for the Canary
> Islands).
> In the past, ccTLDs have been delegated for some of these. If I understand
> correctly IANA's policy, automatical delegation upon request will no
longer
> be the case in the future, and a "nihil obstat" declaration from
ISO-3166/MA
> will be required. But you might want to check this with IANA.
> In other words, even inclusion in the reserved list might not be a
> guarantee.
>
> >What about Taiwan, Palestina, Macau, Timor...?
>
> See above.
> Moreover, Palestina (the Palestinian Territory) is recognized by the UN,
and
> if by Timor you mean East Timor, this is also the case.
>
> >Why ISO says United Kingdom = .gb, and the ICANN says United Kingdom =
.uk?
>
> This was a mistake by IANA, and the fix will be worse than the damage, as
it
> would oblige all domain names to change. But don't worry, ICANN will never
> delegate .gb. You might also take into account that ISO refused to
register
> the code "UK" as representing the name "United Kingdom", because it was
> formed by two generic words ("United" and "Kingdom") that were not
> geografically identifying a part of the world. The UK was successful,
> though, in getting this through IANA. Oddly enough, the argumentation for
> denying UK by ISO was not applied to US ("United" and "States").
>
> >Why a zone without representation in the UNO like the Antartica (.aq) has
a
> >ISO3166 standard?
>
> It is explained in the ISO-3166 documentation itself.
>
> >Why needs a ccTLD an unhabited region like Bouvet Island (.bv) or Heard
> >Island (.hm)?
>
> They probably don't need it, but it has been asked for, and delegated when
> nobody at IANA did suspect that this would have become a can of worms. But
> you might ask Alf (alf.hansen@uninett.no), technical contact for .bv.
> Also, one ICANN Board member is Catalan, Amedeu Abril i Abril
> (Amadeu@nominalia.com), you might want to contact him for advice.
>
> Last but not least:
> >
> >(excuse my english)
> Since being you Catalan, English is your third language, if not more, I
> believe that you are doing an outstanding job. I understand you much
better
> than I understand some native English speakers on this list (but I'm
biased,
> I'm also non-native English speaker).
>
> Best regards
> Roberto
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.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
>
>

--
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                      -->It's very hot here.<--

--
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