RE: [ga] Open letter to the .US Policy Council

["Alf Hansen" <alf.hansen@uninett.no>]

Danny,

I think this is an internal US-matter. Each and every ccTLD has to sort
out locally how they build up their relations to the Local Internet
Community (Including Government).

Such relations will vary from country to country dependant on culture
and tradition.

In the .us context the USG is a local government. As a ccTLD manager for
.no I would not accept if the DNSO started to dictate how my relations
to the Norwegian Government should be and how our internal formation of
local policy was organized.

Best regards,
Alf H
.NO


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf 
> Of DannyYounger@cs.com
> Sent: 13. september 2002 18:45
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Cc: policy.us@neustar.us; NVictory@ntia.doc.gov
> Subject: [ga] Open letter to the .US Policy Council 
> 
> 
> Dear members of the .US Policy Council:
> 
> Jonathan Hudis, American Intellectual Property Law Association 
> Tom Cunningham, Bulk Register, Inc. 
> Juan Otero, National League of Cities 
> Michael D. Palage, Attorney 
> Joe Rubin, U.S. Chamber of Commerce 
> Larry J. Singer, National Association of State Chief 
> Information Officers & 
> Georgia Technology Authority 
> Claudette W. Tennant, American Library Association 
> David Wascher, Delegated Manager, The Registry at Info Avenue 
> James Casey, NeuStar, Inc. 
> Tom McGarry, NeuStar, Inc. 
> 
> 
> 
> I am writing to you through the vehicle of the discussion 
> list provided by 
> the General Assembly of ICANN's Domain Names Supporting 
> Organization because 
> you have not seen fit to provide a discussion list whereby 
> members of the .US 
> Community can directly pose their concerns to you.
> 
> Having attended the Senate hearings in Washington yesterday 
> on S2537/HR3833, 
> the Dot Kids implementation and Efficiency Act of 2002, it 
> was my expectation 
> that the policy advice of your Council would have been tendered for 
> evaluation by the Committee.  I am not aware of any such advice being 
> publicly submitted, nor do I recall seeing any members of the 
> Council present 
> at this session (with the exception of NeuStar staff such as 
> Jim Casey, the 
> NeuStar Director of Policy and Business Development that 
> served as a panelist 
> at the hearing).  
> 
> In the four months since you were convened as a policy body, 
> I have yet to 
> find on the NeuStar website any indication that your Council 
> has ever met, 
> and no minutes of any meetings have ever been posted.  You 
> have not seen fit 
> to provide the ccTLD manager with policy guidance relative to 
> reserved names, 
> nor to the currently undelegated name spaces (which prompted a recent 
> amendment to the DoC SOW invoking an "interim policy"), and 
> clearly you have 
> offered no publicly-posted guidance at all with respect to policy 
> considerations on how to best govern the kids.us namespace.
> 
> You have not posted any schedule for your meetings, nor are 
> your names on the 
> NeuStar website linked to contact email addresses so that you 
> might be 
> accessible and responsible to the public that you serve.
> 
> Is it your intent to actually be communicative and get some 
> work done, or is 
> this Council (half of which is populated by members of the registrar 
> community) just another hoax and sham?
> 
> regards,
> Danny Younger
> --
> 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
> 

--
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