RE: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force

["L Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

On 1 Sep 2001, at 9:54, Peter de Blanc wrote:

> I believe that 
> 
> 1. icann should interact with  ccTLDs.
> 2. ccTLDs should inteact with ICANN.
> 
Yes, interaction is always good.  That means meaningful dialog.

In that vein, ICANN should interact with ALL viable TLDs.

> The Internet is truly global. Both technicasl coordination and model
> policy should be as consistent as possible.

Some consistency is good, but it is still important to maintain 
autonomy and not be "ruled" by an organization that may have no 
understanding or even interest in those you are serving.  When the 
focus of the organization is clearly motivated by corporate interests 
and special interests, the registries are ruled by those concerns 
and not those affected by them.

When you say "model policy" you cover a huge area.  Models can 
be as diverse as the globe.  

> 
> This does not mean that "ICANN rules".
> 

Exactly.  

> Here's an example, ICANN has UDRP, ccTLDs have, or will have "Local
> DRP". Interaction will assure that each TLD has SOME kind of dispute
> resolution policy, and that such policy is applied fairly.

According to applicable national and local laws, yes, but not to 
supersede laws as the current UDRP allows.  TLDs should be free 
to adopt whatever policies they see fit, keeping in mind at all times 
those who use their services.

> 
> Also, interaction and consultation between various constituencies and
> Sos facilitates the security and stability of the global Internet

I would agree.  That is why it is so important to not exclude any 
facet of the global internet.  Exclusion means conflict.  We have 
that now.

> 
> Peter de Blanc

Leah

> 


--
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