Re: [ga] Re: ICANN before the US Senate...
{was reponded to Jim alone by mistake] On 22:08 08/08/03, Jim Ayson said: At 02:32 PM 8/6/2003 -0400, L. Gallegos wrote: Jim, I think you should read carefully the RFC 920 which document the then prevailing worldwide consensus about the internetting of ARPANET and the other local networks and the international public network services. This documents is righfully claimed by ICANN (ICP-3) as the root of its legitimacy. The text is terse but complete - not the ICANN word flood. Youl will see the difference between the ccTLD situation and the g/sTLDs irt NIC (IANA). Nothing has changed except that quite no ccTLD is fullfiling all its then defined obligations as a trustee of the local community (they confuse it with a registry copying NSI). When your trustee dies, you replace it. The same when you do not trust him anymore. ccTLDs are not created by IANA, they are compiled by them as contact point. You will even discover that we made sure that multiorganization TLDs would be easily created. If you want to understand where all this comes from (and hence the logic if it: http://intlnet.org/docs.htm ) RFC 920 consensus (with its RFC 1591 revision) went very well and was respected for a while, until ICANN came, starting with ICP-1, trying to use ISO 3166 and the root for many other purposes that the one they had been created for by Robert Tréhin in 1977. The RT/BP negociated for the other root and TLD administrators are just copying them (http://www.boroon.net/pdf_e/rcdc-05-E-RTBP-RootTLDBestPractices.pdf) jfc |