RE: [ga] New TLD White Paper released

[Steven Heath <Steven.Heath@Optimation.co.nz>]

eric@hi-tek.com wrote:
> 
> > > And if all that is a contradictory mess - we look to the 
> course and conduct
> > > between the parties
> >
> > Very good.  Now, take a hypothetical:
> >
> > Let's say that Country X does not control the corresponding 
> ccTLD in a zone
> > file under the control of a private party who owns a root 
> server not located
> > in Country X.  Let's say that Country X never has had 
> control of that ccTLD.
> > As between Country X and the root server operator, the 
> course of dealing and
> > conduct of the parties is pretty well established - i.e. 
> the ccTLD does not
> > belong to Country X.
> >
> 
> Darn conundrum. When this "hypothetical" occurs ( .AU ) then 
> we see the results.
> It is called redelegation.

Really? OK, I know that some people get confused with country A and country
X talk so lets use .au to compare to John Berryhill's hypothetical outline.

Lets see, did .au reside in Australia?

Yes... ok, that's different than Johns outline

OK, was .au run by a resident of Australia?

Yes... ok, that's different than Johns outline

Hmm, ok, was the .au name servers etc located in country?

Yes... ok, that's different than Johns outline

OK Eric, can you please explain, using well written English, why you cited
.au as an example of Johns hypothetical case?

Steven Heath
.nz news & views
www.news.org.nz
--
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