___________________________________________________________________________
____
This message is intended for the individual or entity named above. If you
are not the intended
recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to
others; also please
notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from
your system. Thank you.
___________________________________________________________________________
____
Since ICANN has not yet done anything or proposed anything with respect to
ccTLDs or their registrars, because it is rather busy presently with .com,
.net and .org issues, the ccTLD administrators and registrars are, at the
moment, interested (yes, I understand very interested) bystanders. If and
when this situation changes, there will obviously be plenty of
opportunities for them to participate in the discussions and deliberations.
In the long run ICANN should have some kind of relationships with the
ccTLDs and perhaps with their registrars, but this issue has simply not
worked its way to the top of the pile yet. Please keep in mind that ICANN
consists of (outside the IANA function) Mike Roberts, Andrew McLaughlin, a
volunteer Board with day jobs, and assorted lawyers (and we know what
limited help lawyers can provide); there are only so many things this
rather thin group can do at any one time, and as important as they are, the
ccTLD issues will have to wait. A little patience would be appreciated.
(Embedded
image moved "Antony Van Couvering" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
to file: 06/24/99 03:38 PM
pic02179.pcx)
Extension:
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: (bcc: Joe Sims/JonesDay)
Subject: RE: [IFWP] The CORE plot thickens ... Re: [announce] Registrars
Constituency
Joe Sims wrote,
>With
>respect to the registrar constituency, that was specifically intended as
a
>vehicle for accredited registrars to provide their specific input. Since,
>as you point out, there are other ways in which your input can be
provided,
>including general public comment in addition to the other constituencies,
>there seems no particular reason to dilute the focus of the registrar
>constituency. To the best of my knowledge, you get no prizes for being in
>a particular constituency, and your voice and views are certainly not
>excluded, so why the fuss?
>
There are two ways to go with this, and I believe that only one way is
being
pointed out with this message and with the stance of the registrar
constituency.
Either:
1. ccTLDs, their resellers, agents, and customers play a tangential role in
the ICANN process, restricting their concern to such actions on the part of
ICANN that might impact their ability to run a smooth root zone;
or
2. ccTLDs, their resellers, agents, and customers are welcomed into the
ICANN process, and ccTLDs will pay attention to the broader efforts of
ICANN
and will participate.
It appears from Ken Stubb's message and from Joe Sims', that #1 is
indicated. In any case there are many in the ccTLD constituency who feel
that ICANN ought to restrict its activities to gTLDs. If ccTLD registrars
aren't going to be allowed into the registrar constituency, then ICANN
should not expect ccTLDs to pay any attention to ICANN resolution
concerning
registrars.
I don't think this will break any hearts among the ccTLDs.
Antony
pic02179.pcx
