Re: AGN-DNS EARTH/USA Registry Terms and Conditions FIRST DRAFT

[Dave Morton <Dave.Morton@ecrc.de>]

>John,
>
>Well, my personal view is that I wouldn't want to 
>allocate '.usa' and I've argued this within the IAHC.
>
>In fact, let me generalize that statement, I don't feel 
>too good about allocating any Alpha-3 (3 letter) codes 
>from the ISO 3166 standard. My reason is these are 
>'national geo-political' TLDs and therefore they don't 
>really fall into the category of 'international top level 
>domains'. 

Robert, now explain to me please what national geo-political
means ? As soon as one discusses new iTLDs then the cat is out
of the bag....

I fail to see a clear distinction...

Dave


>As you probably know, some ISO 3166 TLD registries are 
>controlled to varying degrees by governments - this is 
>especially true for those with more restrictive telecommunications 
>environments than the US. Even here in Switzerland, we'll 
>probably see '.ch' eventually fall under the jurisdiction of 
>OFCOM, the Swiss national telecom regulatory authority.

God help us - there are organisations in many countries who
are quite capable of handling both the two letter and perhaps
in future the 3 letter domains without government regulation 
and in a fair and proper manner for all. Lets keep government
out of this wherever possible please.

>Needless to say, it is not much of a stretch to pre-suppose that 
>Alpha-3 ISO 3166 TLDs (e.g., .usa) would fall under similiar types 
>of 'jurisdiction'. While this may or may not be true for .usa, I 
>think you can probably imagine some of the politics involved if 
>certain Alpha-3 ISO code were allocated (for example, it is hard
>to imagine that they should be allocated to anyone but a corresponding
>national entity/individual). Personally, I think it would be better 
>to stay out of the politics and hold/reserve Alpha-3 ISO 3166 codes 
>for future use (or non-use as the case might be).
>
>Robert
>IAHC Member, expressing personal opinions...
>
>