Re: Re[2]: [ga] Urgent: questions for ICANN Board Candidates

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

That's my point.  the ccTLDs would have to be forced to sign 
contracts that would require them to turn over databases to ICANN. 
 Well, take the contract out of the picture since it does not exist 
and while the registries may have data escrowed (and they should, 
of course) they are under no oblgation to turn it over to ICANN.  
They can turn it over to anyone they choose, which is the way it 
should be.  As long as the registry is being operated so that the 
domains resolve via their TLD servers, it is up to ICANN to not 
disenfranchise them by pointing to the correct servers for the TLD 
in question.

ICANN is not a government and should not have the power to 
simply dictate to a ccTLD from another country, and subject to that 
country's culture and laws, that the registry should take the 
database and place it in the hands of a foreign body that is NOT 
subject to their laws and culture.  It does not matter if the ccTLD 
manager is the government itself or a national of that country.  
Further, if the ccTLD manager contracts with a foreign company to 
operate it's registry, that registry should still belong to that TLD 
manager in the country of origination.

I never said a registry should just disappear.  What I said is that it 
should not necessarily be arbitrarily re-delegated to someone else 
by ICANN or anyone else.  I hope you won't say that it is not being 
done arbitrarily because that is exactly what has happened in AU.

Now to get back to the original subject, the ccTLDs do have the 
leverage to insist that they will not simply kow tow to ICANN 
demands that they remain in the DNSO and they are forming their 
own organization.

I think it would extremely interesting to see what will happen if 
ICANN strong arms them when they have formed an association 
and agree among themselves to abide by their own guidelines for 
best practices.  They do have options and it would not be difficult 
for them to arrange whatever technical assistance they need.  They 
would, I am certain retain their registry databases on whatever 
servers they designate.  ICANN would, indeed, have to find a way 
to replicate it/them on their own designated servers.  It would be a 
fantastic mess and it would not do well for ICANN's apparance of 
legitimacy.

The ccTLDs have indicated they wish to work with ICANN.  Let's 
see if ICANN will work with them.

Leah


On 8 Sep 2001, at 14:45, William X Walsh wrote:

> Saturday, Saturday, September 08, 2001, 2:05:33 PM, L Gallegos wrote:
> 
> > William, are you assuming that if the ccTLD were re-delegated in all
> > countries, that the registry would turn over the database?  They are
> > not all under contract and have obligation to do so.  The new
> > delegation would have to recreate the database and provide new TLd
> > servers.  I would say that it would not be a simple transition in
> > many cases.
> 
> I think it would.  I think that if the ccTLD didn't have the support
> of their government, that they would not have much choice but to do
> so.
> 
> You will recall that I supported mandatory data escrow as a part of
> all registry contracts, and that the registries specifically agree
> that if they are unable or unwilling to continue operating the
> registry, that they agree to sign over any and all intellectual
> property related to the registry, including all databases, to ICANN
> for reassignment to a new registry operator.
> 
> In my opinion, no registry should ever cease to exist.
> 
> -- 
> 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