Re: .africa gTLD

[Dr Nii Narku Quaynor <quaynor@ncs.com.gh>]

Hi Guys,

These "social and political" things may just blind us. This stuff is 
going too far for me. These countries should have done something (in
the past) and did not (for whatever reason). They can still do
something......what happened to negotiation after one realizes an
oversight? buy the guy out and lick your wounds. We cant cry over
spilled milk these days.


Tierno S. Bah wrote:
> 
> Kevin Brown wrote:
> 
> >
> > IANA, according to Perry Metzger ( as IANA never replies on its behalf on
> > this issue) only issue ISO TLDs to countries, or soveriegn bodies.
> > Therefore you must sue the Government of each country to get the domain
> > back. IANA have nothing to do with delagations, once they occur.
> >
> 
> In this case, it's the Governments of Burundi, Congo, Rwanda, and Zaire,
> that
> are, apparently, deprived of their sovereign right over their country
> TLD.
> In the case of Rwanda, M. Elkins <mje@mje99.posix.co.za>,
> has already requested that the .rw TLD be returned to the rightful
> holder
> (the Government of Rwanda) and (Rwandan) operators and users.
> In other words, the IANA delegation may have never occurred.
> Particularly if the Governments of these countries were not notified,
> educated about ISO TLDs, and ultimately acknowledged it. I'm not
> familiar with IANA procedures, but post the list of country TLDs on the
> INTERNET is not  enough for delegating authority. What if the Government
> has no way of accessing email and was never made aware of this new
> asset?
> 
> > IANA do not seem to care about ISO TLDs. There is a seperate policy for
> > .com etc and ISO TLDs.
> 
> If that's the case, it's most unfortunate. Because there is more to the
> Internet than .com. The Zaire-Rwanda-Burundi-Congo situation points to
> cases where ISO TLDs are captured by private groups or individuals, who,
> quite frankly, are not interested in developing Internet connectivity in
> those countries, but seek only to make a fast buck. They would not, for
> instance, reinvest in training, education, R&D in those countries they
> are bilking.
> 
> >
> > The IAHC process is tilted towards Western Countries, and people with
> > money. Hence the obsessive focus on Trademark issues. Forget the basic need
> > for small poor countries to get Internet access.
> >
> 
> I, among others, agree. The overall tone of the IAHC proposal emphasis
> commercialism, market considerations, etc. There was not even mention of
> Internet II, the second generation of the Net, being researched by a
> consortium of American Universities. There was no mention either of the
> social and cultural implications of digital internetworking. IAHC ought
> to correct that.
> As for the "basic needs" of small poor countries, I admit that if the
> IANA fails in reaching consensus, then the "Third World" and the
> disenfranchized in the West will be left out in the mad rush to
> cyberspace.