Re: [ga] DNSO Constituency Structure

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Patrick and all Assembly members,

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:43:05 -0800, Roeland Meyer wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 20:36:27 +1300, David Farrar wrote:
> > > A ccTLD sponsor does not have a sole focus of making a profit.  In
> > > fact for .nz the over-riding priority is to serve the local internet
> > > community.
>
> > Then what should happen is, to hand those ccTLDs back to their
> > designated countries? What are you saying here.
>
> Hi Roeland
>
> I can't speak for New Zealand but I do have experience in Australia.  As you
> may know I am on the Board of auDA, the Australian country code.  Of course,
> I speak in my personal capacity and not on behalf of the Board.
>
> As I see it, each ccTLD is like a mini-ICANN.  As it may not have any
> responsibility for IP addresses perhaps it is more appropriate to equate a
> ccTLD with the DNSO.  At least that's the way I see it.

  Good point here Patrick.  Would it not than be reasonable that if
a group of the ccTLD's wish to band together in some fashion that
they would then be a defacto ccSO?

>
>
> Now the DNSO is made up of seven constituencies representing registrars,
> registries, businesses, trade marks etc.  Each ccTLD may be organised
> similarly (i.e. with some form of constituency structure).
>
> In Australia, for example, auDA's membership is open to interested parties
> in three categories of membership - Supply, Demand and Representative
> Associations.  Representatives from each of these classes sit on the board
> of auDA for two year terms.
>
> As provided in the Constitution, the auDA Board comprises:
> *    Three (3) persons elected by Supply Class Members;
> *    Three (3) persons elected by Demand Class Members;
> *    Three (3) persons elected by Representative Association Class Members;
> *    Two (2) persons elected by the Members voting together as a whole;
>
> For details, see http://www.auda.org.au/about/board.html
> This composition makes it very hard for any one group to "capture" the
> Board.
>
> You can see, perhaps, that David Farrar seems to be saying that a ccTLD
> is really neither "supply" or "demand" like a gTLD registry.  It should not,
> therefore, be lumped in with supply as Chuck Gomes seemed to suggest.

  Perhaps Patrick.  But do not ccTLD managers/companies provide
a service to registrants as their primary function?  If yes, than isn't it
reasonable to assume that Chuck is quite right?  I think it is.

>
>
> This is why ccTLDs argue for consideration as a separate Supporting
> Organisation rather than a separate constituency within the DNSO.
>
> I have tried to provide a better focus on the problem by asking members
> of the GA to consider the underlying supply-demand reality.
>
> Best regards
> Patrick Corliss
>
> --
> 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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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