Re: Draft New Draft

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 03:38:06PM -0500, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
> 
> > Kent, you talk about these relationships, but I just don't know of very
> many.
> > Which of the many ccTLDs that have relations with sovereign governments
> > are you talking about?  If you mean that governments are aware of their
> > existence, then I suppose that's a relationship, and you are correct.
> > If you mean that there is any formal or contractual relationship,
> > I believe you are gravely mistaken.  Would you care to give some examples?
> > Of domains with more than 15,000 names in them (the top 20), I can think
> of
> > only two.
> 
> I *didn't* say that the top 20 ccTLDs (or indeed any) had no relationship
> with governments.  I said that they had no formal or contractual
> relationship with governments.

And what I said was that I was only interested in *de facto*
relationships, regardless of formality.  It was you that changed that
to "formal or contractual". 

Willie Black, for example, tells me that Nominet understands *very
well* that they run with the implicit permission of the UK
government, and it is my strong impression that this is true for most
of the European registries.  This is de facto control by the
associated sovereign, which is the only thing of importance -- not 
whether there is a formal contract.

-- 
Kent Crispin, PAB Chair				"Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com				lonesome." -- Mark Twain