FW: [ga-roots] TLD's

["Gene Marsh" <marshm@anycast.net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga-roots@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga-roots@dnso.org]On Behalf
> Of Dassa
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 11:16 PM
> To: ga-roots@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [ga-roots] TLD's
<SNIP>

> The TLDA would appear to be mostly associated with roots other than the
> legacy root.  To declare that it doesn't have anything to do with any root
> is a little misleading.  It is noticed that ORSC is one of the supporting
> associations to the TLDA as evidenced on the TLDA website.
> Also from: http://www.tlda.org/about/press/PR2001032501.html
> The TLDA has issued the following preliminary mission statement:

If you had been "observing" the TLDA as you say you have, you would know
that the TLDA has been in existence since May 1999.  At that time, the TLDA
had been organized as another potential gTLD constituent, and was
represented in Berlin at the ICANN meeting.  At that time, there were
several individuals and entities who expressed their support of the TLDA,
including the ORSC and IODesign.  They believed that the concept was
correct.

Since then, the TLDA had been somewhat dormant until late February of this
year.  Some of the web content has remained the same - some of it has
changed.  The supporters of the TLDA are just that, supporters.  Not
members.  When the full-term board is elected for the TLDA, all supporters
will be contacted to determine whether they support the TLDA under its new
bylaws and organization.

>
> The Top Level Domain Association (TLDA) is a not-for-profit trade
> association of Top Level Domain Holders, serving the public
> interest. Among
> our purposes are to represent member TLD Holders as a whole to business,
> industry, government, and the media; to promote Internet commerce through
> the growth of the world-wide TLD industry and its related businesses; to
> document and promote standards and best practices for the operation and
> management of TLDs; to serve as a clearing house providing for the fair
> resolution of TLD collisions; to promote cooperation and provide liaison
> between TLD Holders and Root Managers in the interests of collision-free
> choice to the world Internet community; to periodically publish a single,
> up-to-date, comprehensive compilation of all known TLDs; and to
> educate and
> inform the public of the public service that TLDA provides.
>
> It is noted the mission statement includes references to Root Managers.

And what is your point here?

>
> I gather the intention of the TLDA is to be inclusive of TLD operators in
> both the legacy and other roots, is this correct?  It will be extremely
> interesting to see the membership details in another 6-12 months
> and to see
> how many root TLD operators join.  Does the TLDA intend to also allow
> memberships from ccTLD's?

Please read the membership criteria:

A root operator is NOT qualified to be a member unless they are a TLD
holder.

- Does the ORSC hold a TLD? (NO)
- Does PacRoot hold a TLD? (NO)
- Does ICANN hold a TLD? (NO)

Now...

- Does DoC hold a TLD? (YES)

...and yes, holders of ccTLDs would be welcome to become members if they
meet the criteria.

>
> |> Once again, this has nothing whatever to do with how decisions are
> |> made wrt to TLDs by the roots.  Nothing.  They are two totally
> |> different concepts and functions.
>
> That would seem at odds with the Mission Statement.

No, it does not.  You may insist the sky is orange... that does not change
the fact tha is blue.

>
> |> The only possible observation is that this association declined
> |> stewardship of a TLD.  It was certainly not determinative of
> |> the fate of the TLD or its transfer.  It was not transferred - at least
> not
> |> by or to the association.  That was precisely the point, I beleive.
>
> No, the point I was making was the fact that a TLD "could" be transferred
> in such a way.  And that the only parties involved in the potential
> transfer were the individual TLD operator and the Board of TLDA,
> a total of
> 6 people.

Yes, and one person can start a nuclear war.  It is the value of choice that
is in question here.  Our board took appropriate action on an offer we
should not/could not accept

>
> I appreciate the time you are taking in answering my questions.  I hope
> that all benefit from the exchange and more knowledge is gained that will
> benefit us all.
<SNIP>

Yes, Dassa, but the manner in which you raise these points is inflammatory.
You make statements as if they were fact.  You have not taken any measure of
professionalism to ask questions instead.

Gene...
=================================
Gene Marsh
president
Top Level Domain Association Inc.
http://www.tlda.org
=================================

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html