> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jim Dixon
> Sent: Friday, January 15, 1999 4:38 PM
> To: IFWP Discussion List
> Subject: [ifwp] Re: Commentary on ICC submission
>
>
>
> IANA always treated ccTLDs differently from gTLDs. Specifically, IANA
> assumed that it had the power to create IAHC to devise a new policy
> regarding gTLDs. It was very clear at all times that IANA understood
> that it had no power over ccTLDs. Postel chose, very wisely, to adopt
> a policy of deference to the relevant sovereign government.
>
Rather, Postel chose, very wisely, to choose wisely when it was wise to do
so, if you take my point. In some cases the government was deferred to; in
others, where they were being unfair, IANA solved the problem by mediating
it; in some cases where the mediation didn't work, the domain simply ceased
to function while the parties tried to work something out. There was never
a consistent policy in practice.
Antony
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
