RE: [wg-c] Consensus call

["Josh Elliott" <jelliott@tucows.com>]

I believe that "file" was lost some time ago and is no longer on file at
IANA/ICANN.

Sorry.

Josh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-c@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Simon
> Higgs
> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 1:44 AM
> To: wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-c] Consensus call
>
>
> At 04:49 PM 4/12/00 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
>
> >On 13-Apr-2000 Christopher Ambler wrote:
> > > I'm sure the majority of people reading this list (and not
> posting) aren't
> > > fooled by the FUD and rhetoric coming out of you, William.
> >
> >No Chris, I'm sure that the majority are not fooled by yours and Simon's
> >attempts to twist history and facts to bolster claims to TLDs
> that you self
> >claimed, and have no right to, and have no right to expect any advanced
> >standing to.
>
> Who is claiming anything? There's a list of legally binding TLD
> applications filed, per RFC1591, sitting in a file in IANA/ICANN. The NSF
> has made it clear that only TLDs filed in way will be considered:
>
> http://name.space.xs2.net/law/answers/letters/NSF-NSI08111997.jpg
> "The Foundation [NSF] and NSI agreed that new TLDs would be added only in
> accordance with Request For Comments 1591."
>
> What part of this don't you understand? Are you still a sore
> loser because
> you can't have your own ccTLD?
>