RFC 1591 and ccTLD's (was Draft new draft)

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

Kent, Anthony,Eberhart, Javier and William,

I would like to add my lowly  2ct to this discussion.
Rather than enshrining RFC 1591, or take parts of Jon's memo out of context
,we should take a hard look at the reality of today.
There is no uniform picture.

1. The text of the MoU between NTIA and ICANN, recognizes the ultimate
right of sovereign nations over "their" ccTLD's.  (i know, this is
ambiguous for some ccTLD's)

2. Some important nations have already aggressively asserted  control and
have handed regulation over to a newly created bureaucracy.

3. Other governments are sitting on the fence. They allow the status quo to
continue, but make sure that government officials participate in
policymaking of the IANA delegatee in a private capacity.
This is actually the worst solution and, because they are not "officialy"
involved, can give rise to unaccountability of the worst kind.  
Government sanctioned unaccountability. Registration fees have the
unofficial status of a DN tax, but there is no parliamentary oversight.
Policies have the status of unofficial law.
I have great sympathy for the position that it is better to keep
incompetent, heavy handed and bureaucratic meddlers out of ccTLD
management, but there is a reverse side to this coin as well.

In a democratic country, parliament is supposed to represent the people.
Laws provide for government oversight  to combat anti-competitive monopolies.
If in such a country a ccTLD is run by an unaccountable clique, it is only
a matter of time before politicians will be called upon to challenge what
is going on.
Then, government will be forced to intervene and regulate.
To prevent this from happening, ccTLD managers need to take steps to
democratize their procedures and self-regulate by giving registrants a say
in their policies. 

As for less than benevolent governments-- I do not think that it is
realistic to expect that ICANN will stand up to them and refuse a request
for transfer of authority, once they wake up to the internet. The
registrants, if allowed (!),  will simply flee to other TLD's.

4. Some governments have come to a formal agreement with the ccTLD
delegatee. No matter what the text of this agreement currently is, it
recognizes the ultimate sovereignty of the nation over "its" ccTLD space.
Such agreements are dependent on the continued political will to abide by
them.  

Eberhart wrote:
>What the current ccTLD operators want and need is Due Process. 

I would like to add: what the registrants want and need is Due Process.
They will seek it wherever they can get it.
--Joop--
http://www.democracy.org.nz/model.html