[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] Older registrations
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 10:08:27AM -0800, Simon Higgs wrote:
> Two things are important in this discussion. Reality and an accurate record
> of history.
>
> I was there. You weren't.
"I was there" != "What I say is an accurate reflection of history".
> You can say whatever you want. I'll stand by the
> historical facts:
>
> In 1995/1996, IANA solicited new iTLD requests under the guidelines laid
*********
Not fact.
> out in RFC1591. IANA received many new iTLD applications and published the
> results on the IAHC-discuss mailing list (archived at www.gtld-mou.org for
> some inexplicable reason).
IANA published the collection of applications that people had sent in
over a substantial period of time, whether on whim
> At the same time, IANA started the process to
> establish unquestionable authority to formally introduce new TLDs
> (beginning with the "Postel drafts" and now under ICANN). The iTLD
> applications received by IANA were printed out and placed in a file at IANA
> (I've seen the file - it exists) pending the results of that process.
>
> And here we are.
>
> As Harald has correctly pointed out, these applications may or may not be
> granted.
That's not what Harald pointed out, and that is not what the disclaimer
said. It said "no conclusions had been reached yet" and "don't plan on
it".
> The point is that in order to grant or deny an application, it has
> to be processed first.
Nope. "Not processed" == "implicit deny".
> One thing is certain, the applications cannot be
> ignored.
Of course they can. They almost certainly will be.
--
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
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