RE: [wg-review] Clarifications requested from BoD, Staff, NC, TC,Chair prior to co-Chair elections

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> From: Bret Busby [mailto:bret@clearsol.iinet.net.au]
> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 1:22 AM
> 
> Roeland Meyer wrote:
> > 
> > You're missing the point Bret. They actual infrastructure 
> of the internet,
> > the wires, fibre, routers, and switches, are all owned by 
> the ISPs. That's
> > what makes them ISPs. If ICANN owned all that stuff, they'd 
> also be an ISP.
> > If you owned all that stuff, you'd be an ISP. The point is, 
> you don't, ICANN
> > doesn't, and neither does the USG. Inter-ISP relations are 
> governed by what
> > is called "peering agreements". Those are privately 
> brokered deals. None of
> > us gets a vote there (well, almost none of us).

> I see. So, it is the ISP's,that make the rules, that govern 
> the Internet
> (as far as domain names are concerned), and, are responsible for the
> registration, and, administration, of domain names.
> 
> I had believd that it was ICANN.

If the ISPs chose to use an alternative root-zone, different from that
controlled by the ICANN, there's nothing the ICANN could do about it. The
individual ISPs could also get together and build their own IP address
registry. Actually, so could the ccTLDs. Some of them are national ISPs
(jp?).

> So, ICANN has no responsibility, and, no role, and, just sits 
> there and has nothing to do.

ICANN has not yet been handed control of the root-zone, so they don't even
have that much. It is still with /USG/DOC/NTIA. The whole point of this
excersize is to get things where we DO have a say.

> Thank you for that clarification.

You're very welcome
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html