Re: [ga] DOT DANNY -- It's the problem?

["M. Morfin" <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Danny,
"we" who are they?

The agreement "we" (FCC licensee for the name space) reached is 
documented in RFC 920 
(http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0920.txt?number=920) and organises the 
DNS for 32 years. Multiorganisation TLDs are OK if there is at least 
a prospective number of 500 registrants. Period.

The rest is accepted consensus violation. IETF has deprecated RFC 920 
for technical aspects also addressed in RFC 1591. This does not 
change that we stroke a deal. That deal makes ICANN legitimate 
(www.icann.org/icp/icp-3.htm). Your perpetual debate only violates 
it. As much as ICANN over-bureaucracy.

I would like to understand what you want to obtain.
Merry Xmas.
jfc


At 23:36 23/12/2005, Danny Younger wrote:
> I started thinking about the upcoming TLD application
> for .berlin
>
> There are those that will argue that instead of
> granting the sponsoring organization for this
> initiative a top level domain for Berlin, we should
> instead be insisting that Berlin rightly belongs on
> another level (as in berlin.de or berlin.eu or
> berlin.de.eu).  If we accept this argument, then we
> are accepting a taxonomic approach which calls for
> geographic labels to abide by whatever hierarchy is
> set by a country code or regional code manager.
>
> The flip side of the argument might be to state that
> there is nothing inherently wrong with granting
> municipalities a top level domain.  You can have
> .berlin, .nyc, .saigon, .moscow and thousands of other
> cities occupying space at the top level without
> occasioning any harm.
>
> The final decision that we make will set the pattern
> for the future.  On what principles shall we base our
> selection criteria?  We need a forward-going policy.
> What will it be?
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________
> Yahoo! DSL ­ Something to write home about.
> Just $16.99/mo. or less.
> dsl.yahoo.com