RE: [cctld-discuss] Re: [council] IANA Report on the .pnTop-LevelDomain

[Theresa Swinehart <Theresa.Swinehart@wcom.com>]

Dennis,

While I appreciate the effort to not overburden the lists with e-mails, in
this case if I could ask if you could share your comments to Andrew with the
Names Council list? With the dialogue having started on the Council list I
think it would be useful for the NC to have a good understanding of the
issues and views.

Thanks much

Theresa


-----Original Message-----
From:	owner-council@dnso.org [mailto:owner-council@dnso.org] On Behalf Of
Dennis Jennings
Sent:	Thursday, February 17, 2000 7:04 PM
To:	mclaughlin@pobox.com
Cc:	Elisabeth Porteneuve; cctld-discuss@lists.wwtld.org; council@dnso.org;
touton@icann.org
Subject:	Re: [cctld-discuss] Re: [council] IANA Report on the
.pnTop-LevelDomain

 << File: Dennis.Jennings.vcf >> All,

I have responded privately to Andrew.

Dennis

Andrew McLaughlin wrote:
>
> Dennis:
>
> ICANN's staff executes policy as it exists.  Policy development and
changes
> in existing policy require consultation and the development of a bottom-up
> consensus.  But it's not part of the ICANN design (indeed, it would be
> impossible) to demand a bottom-up consensus on every single decision taken
> under ICANN policies.
>
> The line between what is policy development and policy execution is, of
> course, not always an easy one to define.  But where (as in this case)
> existing policy is clear (ICP-1) <http://www.icann.org/icp/icp-1.htm>, and
> the situation falls squarely within existing policy, the ICANN/IANA staff
> acts as required by the policy.
>
> Future policies might, of course, require certain kinds of consultation
> before the staff acts.  But in the case of .pn, ICANN/IANA staff simply
> acted as required by existing policy.
>
> --Andrew
>
> [ -----Original Message-----
> [ From: Dennis Jennings [mailto:Dennis.Jennings@ucd.ie]
> [ Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 1:24 AM
> [ To: Elisabeth Porteneuve
> [ Cc: cctld-discuss@lists.wwtld.org; council@dnso.org;
> [ mclaughlin@pobox.com; touton@icann.org
> [ Subject: Re: [cctld-discuss] Re: [council] IANA Report on the .pn
> [ Top-Level Domain
> [
> [
> [ Elisabeth,
> [
> [ I would hope that this is not the case.  ICANN has been established as a
> [ consultative botton-up organisation and should consult before
> [ acting.  In this
> [ case it probably will not matter as there is probably consensus that the
> [ decision is a correct one - but in future cases this may not be
> [ the situation.
> [ I would not like ICANN to damage its credibility with a key component
(the
> [ ccTLDs) of the organisation (and a proposed key funder).
> [
> [ Dennis
> [ -------
> [ Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:
> [ >
> [ > Dennis wrote:
> [ > >
> [ > > ccTLD Colleagues,
> [ > >
> [ > > Please see below a message from Loius Touton of ICANN on the
> [ proposed change of
> [ > > delegation of the .pn Pitcairn Island ccTLD.  Please let me
> [ have any comments
> [ > > you may have so that I may advise the Names Council of the
> [ ccTLD Constituency
> [ > > views.
> [ > >
> [ > > On the basis of the information presented in the report, the
> [ proposal to
> [ > > re-delegate seems reasonable to me.
> [ > >
> [ > > However, it would seem appropriate that the new ccTLD Manager
> [ be required to
> [ > > sign up to ccTLD Best Practice as part of the re-delegation
> [ process (see the
> [ > > separate message on the CENTR Best Practice Guidelines for
> [ ccTLD Managers).
> [ > >
> [ > > Dennis
> [ >
> [ > ==> According to the root and NSI database, the change has already
> [ >     taken place -- the .PN has been updated on 11-Feb-2000.
> [ >
> [ >     whois -h whois.networksolutions.com "handle PN5-DOM"
> [ >
> [ >     The DNSO GA was discussing about, see for exemple:
> [ >         http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc03/msg01454.html
> [ >         http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc03/msg01471.html
> [ >
> [ >     Elisabeth
> [ >
> [ > >
> [ > > -------- Original Message --------
> [ > > Subject: [council] IANA Report on the .pn Top-Level Domain
> [ > > Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 14:29:06 -0800
> [ > > From: Louis Touton <touton@icann.org>
> [ > > To: council@dnso.org
> [ > >
> [ > > To the Names Council:
> [ > >
> [ > > Today the IANA is issuing a report on the 1997 request of the
> [ > > Pitcairn Island Council that the delegation of the .pn domain
> [ > > be changed.  A copy of the report appears at
> [ > > <http://www.icann.org/general/pn-report-11feb00.htm>.  The report
> [ > > concludes, based on existing ccTLD policy as set forth in
> [ > > ICP-1 <http://www.icann.org/icp/icp-1.htm>, that the delegation
> [ > > should be changed.  ccTLD delegation and administration policies
> [ > > are on the agenda for the March 9 public forum in Cairo.
> [ > >
> [ > > Louis Touton
> [ > >
> [ >
> [ > --
> [ > ccTLD Constituency of the DNSO
> [ > Discussion Mailing List
> [ > (Formerly wwtld@ripe.net)