Re: [ga] DNSO Constituency Structure

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

Patrick, Jeff and Roeland,

This is dynamite stuff.  If we look at our pending and evolving best
practices how
can we move this into a productive and solid position concept?

Joanna and Bill what is the next step?

Sincerely,
Eric

Jeff Williams wrote:

> 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,
>
--
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