Re: [ga] IDNO -- This affects you.

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

After rereading this for the umpteenth time it hit me that this was
exactly correct.

If we removed the DN issues from ICANN and set them up in a different
Organization for just that purpose and signed a contract with DoC for
just that purpose.  Then everyone would be in a better position to
accomplish matters.  Perhaps it is not possible to have the same plant
produce sardines and autos simultaneously.

You know it never even occurred to Postel that the names would be so
huge.  In fact the phenom is only about three years old.

Food for thought, and please do not eat the waiter.

"William S. Lovell" wrote:

> Skipping past the personality issues, I think a bit of history will
> help
> explain the dilemma in which those who want an individual domain
> name holders constituency faces, and this background comes from
> some material posted by Amadeu Abril i Abril in the context of the
> recent election. He pointed out that ICANN was to be a technical
> body, and the original SOs were defined in terms of their technical
> function. The purpose was to set up, operate, and maintain a
> properly functioning internet system, including a domain name
> system, and that was all.  Consequently, no thought was given to
> any representation by users, domain name holders, or the like,
> since they had no technical role to perform, but only to make use
> of whatever ICANN created.
--
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