Re: [ga] About GA membership again......

["William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 27-Mar-2000 Christopher Ambler wrote:
> Also, please define, as you're using it, "authorized process." If IANA had
> no
> authorization to do what they did, then they also could not have created
> any "authorized process." We know that the USG did not create an
> "authorized process" either. RFC1591, if IANA has no authorization, is
> also not an "authorized process."

Yes, the USG did create a process that bears their imprimatur.  They still have
 to approve the results, as a matter of fact.  

I'll give you one point for being good at word games, Chris.   But I won't get
caught up in them with you.

The current process bears the approval and direct supervision of the USG, who
specifically gave ICANN the authority to move forward with creating a plan for
adding new gTLDs.    Prior to this,  IANA had no authority to mange any new
process with regard to new gTLDs without specific approval of the USG.

- --
William X. Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
http://userfriendly.com/
Fax: 877-860-5412 or +1-559-851-9192
GPG/PGP Key at http://userfriendly.com/wwalsh.gpg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1c (Mandrake Linux)
Comment: Userfriendly Networks http://www.userfriendly.com/

iD8DBQE439xK8zLmV94Pz+IRAn7yAJ0UEDSbdhfOqLXVv1SuMRiAbh6GzgCfV4ej
Jnu1LLfHH/eLF3FTtuCoT4Q=
=6hQ+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
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