Re: CORE Show Stopper

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

Antony and all,

Antony Van Couvering wrote:
> 
> At 08:38 PM 11/30/97 -0500, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> >I get the impression that the MoU covers any domain the MoU'ites
> >invent. Do correct me if I'm wrong.
> >
> >Thanks for your quick and courtious reply, Antony.
> 
> Richard,
> 
> If I was discourteous, it's because -- assuming that you're an intelligent
> person -- you are willfully misinterpreting what is laid out in print, and
> attempting to make it seem as if there were any question here, which there
> isn't.
> 
> But, for those readers who have recently joined and haven't had the
> pleasure of reading repeated explanations, let me say again that ever since
> the early days of the IAHC, it has been said that that more TLDs were
> envisioned, that the 7 initial ones were just to get things started, just
> as the initial round of registrars were there to get things started.
> 
> The only rules laid out in the gTLD-MoU are that they will be three
> characters or longer, and that they are "generic", which means that they
> are not country-code TLDs and they aren't "specialist" TLDs, such as .mil
> or .int.
> 
> I'll quote it again:
> 
> SECTION 9. - gTLDs
>    b.If, in consultation with the PAB and CORE, the POC should later
> determine, that the interests of the users of the Internet would be best
> served by the creation of additional gTLDs within the DNS, beyond those
> created in (a) above [i.e., the 7 on the table], each additional gTLD, if
> any, shall be created and
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> administered within the provisions of this MoU and the CORE-MoU.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Each additional gTLD created shall consist of a three or greater
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> character alphanumeric identifier.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Note that it says "gTLD" not "any TLD".  The administration of TLDs under
> the gTLD-MoU is limited to generic TLDs, as defined in the gTLD-MoU.

  Yes, but this time you conviently left out section 10 for the new
readers, which I will now again provide.

SECTION 10. - TLDs Not Subject to the Provisions of this MoU
   a.Pending the expiration or appropriate amendment of the Cooperative
Agreement under which the ".com", ".org" and ".net" gTLDs are presently
administered, the ".com", ".org" and ".net" gTLDs shall not be subject
to
the provisions of this MoU.
   b.Likewise, until the ".com", ".org" and ".net" gTLDs are subject to
the
provisions of this MoU, the registrar which administers those gTLDs
shall
not be considered to be a gTLD Registrar for the purposes of this MoU.
   c.The two-character top level domain name space within the DNS, which
is
reserved for ISO 3166 country codes under existing accepted Internet
RFCs,
shall not be subject to the provisions of this MoU.
   d.All other top level domain names which are not explicitly included
in
the set of "generic" top level domains are not subject to the provisions
of
this MoU.

  The point I believe that Richard Sexton was making is the gTLD and TLD
are really in a sense moot as far as a clasification of "TLD".  All
non-spicific "TLD's" are gTLD's and therefore under section 9 are
subject to what the MoU determines.  SO, in conclusion this makes
the CORE-MoU and the gTDL-MoU CLUB, a minority controling the majority's
wishes or determining what those wishes are.  
> 
> Antony
> 

Regards,

-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. (Soon to be INEG. INC) Stay tunned! 
Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com

Wisdom:   "One who knows others is wise,
           one who knows himself is enlightened."
           Lao Tzu