Re[4]: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force

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

Thursday, Thursday, August 30, 2001, 5:44:37 PM, Peter Dengate-Thrush wrote:

>> Certainly the ccTLDs can see that the one major issue ICANN was under
>> both governmental as well as public pressure over was the expansion of
>> gTLDs, so a certain amount of focus on that should be understood.
>>
> An interesting demonstration of the cultural bias that is part of the point
> we make. I assume you mean the US government's pressure. My government, to
> the contrary, has not put any pressure on my organisation (Internet New
> Zealand) to expand gTLDs, nor on anyone else including ICANN. This is true
> for most if not all of the ccTLDs in the Constituency.

Well, to be direct, at least right now until ICANN gets more sturdy on
its own, the US Government is really the one that has the most
influence, if not dominance, over ICANN.

But remember, the EU governments were also critical of the lack of
progress on this.

>> However, what as the ccTLD community done to bring its issue before
>> the DNSO for discussion and consideration and proposal of policies?
>> Have they sat around waiting for ICANN and the DNSO community to bring
>> the issues up for them and then have them dealt with?

> Of course not. The question points out how little you know about what the
> cc's have been doing for 3 years, which means we have, plainly,  not
> communicated effectively to you about this. Fortunately, all of our
> important stakeholders are aware of the effort that has gone into Best
> Practices, Root server contracts, delegation and re-delegation, and
> financing ICANN. Although these my be of no interest to you, you can find
> them on the Constituency websites, and those of most of the Constituency's
> regional organisations.

> You will see that they have little if anything to do with domain names,
> which is why discussing them in the DNSO is inappropriate.

I see this two ways.

One, they related to the ccTLD registry, so that automatically makes
the issues related to domain name policy, and under the DNSO umbrella.

Secondly, you can look at this as outside the DNSO and just part of
the issues that stakeholders in the gTLD community also have to look
at.  The same setup I mentioned in my email applies.  These issues
alone do not justify a separate SO.

>>
>> The ccTLD community needs to take more responsibility for getting its
>> issues the attention and direction they require.
>>
> Agreed. Which is why we are forming an international association of CC
> managers. We expect some of our time after that to be spent operating as a
> Support Organisation inside ICANN. The rest of the time we will be getting
> on with other major issues affecting us globally.]

I suggest instead you address your issues via a liaison setup, and
remain active as a constituency in the SO that you belong in, the
Doman Name SO.


-- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

--
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