Re: ISO 3166 namespace administration & Proposal

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Kevin,

  Please read below your comments.

Kevin Brown wrote:
> 
> At 21:00 +0300 28/12/96, Cary Karp wrote:

> >
> >I have little idea what discussion may have taken place between
> >Perry and Kevin on these matters. There is, however, an issue
> >of broader importance here that I hope is not being dismissed
> >with Perry's latest communication.
> >
> >However inappropriate it might be to suggest that the IANA
> >address issues of national domain management against the will of
> >a government, there is an equally apparent need for a mechanism
> >by which the IANA and the national authority can come to
> >agreement in case either is unhappy with the other's action.
> >(Ergo my query about the potential utility of a collegium of
> >nTLD managers.)
> Cary,
> 
> This has been my point. RFC 1591 ( I think, correct me if I am wrong)
> has certain policies, and speak of community concensus. I have asked as to
> where the docs are stored regarding delegations OVER and OVER. However,
> sadly IANA cannot or refuse to answer. Perry got elected IANA defendor, but
> Perry seems to ignore Delegation policy.

  Perry in my and others observation seems to ignor alot, form
experiance
of his lack of understanding of postings on this list and his own
postings.
Are you supprised?  I am.  I had assumed that all of the members would
be more careful.  But it seems that their intrest is in political
postering rather than meaningful debate and discussion.  

> 
> I say if IANA make errors today with delegation, and thet refuse to divulge
> how delegations occur, then what hope for any new TLDs?

  Not much, it this attitude continues, at least not from the IANA or
the 
IAHC.
> 
> >
> >On what basis does the IANA decide to delegate nTLD authority,
> >in the first place?  Surely, there must be some discussion of
> >technical requirements and reasonable willingness to adhere to
> >at least some basic rules of TLD management (WHOIS registry,
> >DNS servers, etc). If the IANA simply hands over an nTLD to the
> >first agency submitting a request on a governmental letterhead
> >it ought not to be surprised if difficulty results from
> >subsequent national action. Is there really no provision for
> >on-going review?  Asking what I hope is not an entirely idiotic
> >question, how are the international "routing treaties"
> >established?
> 
> Perry point, speaking as he seems to do for IANA, is that once delegated,
> it is to a soveriegn body, and we cannot do anything, even though IANA
> seems to own the "."

  Well I think that Perry has a good point here.
> >
> >The likelihood of an individual nTLD following the
> >recommendations made in the IAHC Proposal would probably
> >increase if the nTLD had a clear perception of the impending
> >acceptance of those recommendations by other nTLDs. Again,
> >without expecting an official answer, I remain curious as to
> >whether or not the IAHC has considered this aspect of the
> >matter.
> I feel they the have written off ISO TLDs ( or nTLDs). Finito, done deal,
> forget it. Maybe we should have two "."s with two policies?

  I am a believer that this may just happen.  
Regards,

-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. 
Phone :972-447-1878
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com