RE: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force

["Peter de Blanc" <pdeblanc@usvi.net>]

What does "hive it off" mean ??

Peter de Blanc

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Michael
Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 4:45 AM
To: Roberto Gaetano
Cc: jandl@jandl.com; ga@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [ga] Status of the Review Task Force


Since those aspects of ccTLD managment are handled by 'IANA', and 'IANA'
seems to be exempt from all ICANN transparency rules, why not just hive
it off?

(Readers wanting to know about the IANA/ICANN separation fiction are
invited to read a series of articles on ccTLD issues that have appeared
on www.icannwatch.org in the last few months...)


On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Leah,
> 
> >
> >Actually, you have a serious point.  I have long wondered why ccTLDs 
> >should not simply be included in the root and let it go at that.
> 
> 
> With which mechanism?
> I mean, who decides if a "thing" is a ccTLD or not, and if the 
> operator is
> authoritative?
> Somebody must have the responsibility for inclusion of a new TLD,
things do 
> not just happen by themselves.
> 
> >
> >On 30 Aug 2001, at 20:08, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law 
> >wrote:
> >
> > > Actually, I kind of wonder
> > > 1. why icann should have ANY say over ccTLDs?
> 
> Because ccTLDs have no other possibility to be included in the root. 
> The situation is not static, countries appear and disappear, and new 
> records shall be created/removed. You may consider it unfortunate, but

> ICANN has this authority, even if it acts only under adult supervision

> by USG (by USG has made it clear since the Ira Magaziner times that it

> wants to operate behind the curtain, delegating the front role to an 
> entity acting under agreement with USG). In other words, if it is not 
> ICANN, it must be somebody else, since the real owner
> (USG) considers politically unwise to act directly.
> 
> 
> > > 2. why ccTLDs should have ANY say over ICANN?
> > >
> 
> If they don't want to, they should be free not to.
> But if I were a ccTLD Registry, I would consider myself a stakeholder,

> and
> would like to have a say in what is going on. Just like Registrants
are 
> trying to do.
> 
> Regards
> Roberto
> 
> P.S.: Just curious, why these questions? What is the alternative 
> scenario
> that you envisage for entry/exit from the root?
> - ccTLDs "self-manage";
> - USG acting directly;
> - a third entity different from ICANN does it (VeriSign?)
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> 
> 

-- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                 -->It's very hot and humid here.<--

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

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