[wg-c] Re: From Working Group C: Bill Semich's Position on New gTLDs

[Eric Brunner <brunner@world.std.com>]

Oki all,

I'd like to follow up on the exchange between Harald and Kent on the subject
of scope of "chartered" TLDs -- need they be "global", offer NSI adequate
competition, actually be enforced, etc.

Kent mentioned the proposal for a TLD I wrote. I've written on the subject
in one form or another to the gtld-discuss list (July 1997 [1]), the poissed
list (April 7th 1999), to the ICANN list on an Proposed Interim Policy for
Geographic Diversity (May 18th), on the intellectual property aspect on too
may occasions to recall as a co-organizer of the (Indigenous) Intellectual
Property Constituency [2], and unfortunately [3], the dnso-ip mailing list
(usually at odds with Bret and Martin), and of course to this WG back in
July.

Alan Mandell and I presented as much of the core material at the National
Indian Telecommunications Institute's 1999 Digital Council Fires Conference
last May.

Kent wrote:
>                           ...   Furthermore, restricted TLDs need not
> be global -- for example, Eric Brunner has proposed a TLD ".naa" for
> North American Aboriginal peoples.  I am not familiar with the
> organizations involved me, but Eric tells me that there is an
> existing North-America wide inter-tribal organization in a position
> to administer such a TLD. ...
 
We're in a quandry, and to motivate it I'll provide an example. The number of
indigenous DNS operators isn't very great, about the size of the whole DNS
operational community in 1986, when the global ip addressable host count was
about 5K (and I ran SRI's largest internal subnet). Most of us are within
300ms to 500ms of ns99.waikato.ac.nz, the nameserver for New Zealand, and
could operate a "tribal" nameserver (the IWI.NZ SLD) were it to be delegated
from the IANA-delegated ccTLD registrar, ISOCNZ (Domainz). Aoteroa (aka "New
Zealand") however isn't in North America.

The NSN.US SLD is fewer than 100 entries, we could operate it in a moment,
if it were delegated. However, Canada, and "its" Indians, are not in that
bit of North America covered by the .US ccTLD.

The proposal I co-authored for a TLD is primarily focused on North America.
I can't imagine an Indian operated registry seeking to become a registrar
for stateless peoples in Europe, though I can imagine it acting in a fashion
similar to the European (RIPE) and North American (ARIN) Address Registries
and offering a trust service to areas in which the formation of an Address
Registry has lagged (Africa and Latin America, respectively).

To answer the question of would the North American Aboriginal (NAA) registry
be something other than global (Harald's "how a charter for a non-open, global
TLD can be enforced, and by who?"), it wouldn't address Europe, other than
the of indian organizations actually located in Europe (non-global). It also
wouldn't be a registry for non-indians who masquarade as indians (non-open).

Enforcement (means-testing to limiting service to indigenous peoples outside
of North America, and limiting service to Indian interests within North
America) is in our interests -- after all, we're motivated by public trust
as much if not more than most any other existing or would be registry
operator, and we have no registry who's policy or operational practices are
under indigenous control anywhere on earth.

To answer Kent's implicit questions, does my community possess the core
DNS O&M competency, yes it does. If it doesn't, like ICOM this is a job
we can contract out. See niec.org and treaty7.org -- Eric's friends, as
the core of this DNS O&M competency.

Is it "an existing North-America wide inter-tribal organization"? I'll let
the Assembled Chiefs speak from their Vancouver text, entitled

	"Declaration of Kinship and Cooperation among the Indigenous
	 Peoples and Nations of North America through the Assembly of
	 First Nations and the National Congress of American Indians"[5].

The Assembly of First Nations and the National Congress of American Indians
meet in joint assembly last July in the largest convocation of indigenous
leadership in North America in the 20th century, and made the following
declaration:

	...
	Others' hands have drawn boundaries between Canada and the United
	States. These arbitrary lines have not severed, and never will,
	the ties of kinship among our peoples.
	...
	We authorize our national organizations, to inform, assist and
	support each other in the areas of common concern, including:

	    Achieving the full recognition, protection and implementation
	    of the existing legal and political rights of our constituent
	    nations, including those founded in our own national laws, the
	    laws of Canada and the United States, and in the laws of the
	    wider international community;
	    ...
	    Advancing the economic and social well being of the citizens
	    to move freely across the border of Canada and the United States
	    while retaining full recognition of their status as members
	    of indigenous nations.
	    ...
	...

The DNS problem didn't make it on the Vancouver NCAI/AFN agenda, though
the Principle Chiefs and staffs were briefed, as were the heads of two
additional National Indigenous organizations. We may get specific
language out of the October NCAI meeting, or subsequent -- but our O&M
capabilities don't depend upon formal Continental deliberations.

I trust that covers everything except one little item, giving NSI a run
for the market. That is an goal for some other gTLD(s), whether chartered
or not, and that can't be the only reason to consider more than a nominal
number of candidate competitive registry applicants.

Our basic position on the IP problems is contained in [2]. Indigenous
Intellectual Property Rights (universally uninforced in the Internet)
will be enforced by the Indigenous Registry.

Thanks for taking the time to read this,
Eric

References:
[1] http://www.gtld-mou.org/gtld-discuss/mail-archive/04468.html
[2] http://world.std.com/~iipc/
[3] http://www.icann.org/reconsideration/brunner-request-25june99.htm
[4] http://www.dnso.org/dnso/dnsocomments/comments-gtlds/Archives/msg00000.html
[5] http://www.ncai.org/NCAIHomePage/newsreleases/declaration.htm