wwTLD/ccTLD

wwTLD/ccTLD list archives

[cctld-discuss]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [cctld-discuss] ccNSO membership applications.

  • To: Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au>
  • Subject: Re: [cctld-discuss] ccNSO membership applications.
  • From: Paul M Kane <Paul.Kane@nic.AC>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:11:47 +0100
  • CC: cctld-discuss@wwtld.org, member@aptld.org
  • In-Reply-To: <006c01c36d2f$24bd6bb0$ee02a8c0@DISSPAIN>
  • List-Archive: <http://www.wwtld.org/pipermail/cctld-discuss/>
  • List-Help: <mailto:cctld-discuss-request@wwtld.org?subject=help>
  • List-Id: cctld-discuss mailing list <cctld-discuss.wwtld.org>
  • List-Post: <mailto:cctld-discuss@wwtld.org>
  • List-Subscribe: <http://www.wwtld.org/mailman/listinfo/cctld-discuss>,<mailto:cctld-discuss-request@wwtld.org?subject=subscribe>
  • List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.wwtld.org/mailman/listinfo/cctld-discuss>,<mailto:cctld-discuss-request@wwtld.org?subject=unsubscribe>
  • References: <006c01c36d2f$24bd6bb0$ee02a8c0@DISSPAIN>
  • Sender: cctld-discuss-admin@wwtld.org
  • User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)

Hi Chris

Thanks for posting this BUT ... (I really apologies for being the BUT 
man ... have I understood this correctly.....

ICANN are suggesting that in less than 1 week they expect serious ccTLDs 
to commit to something where the costs are not known and they need to 
have their Registry Board Approval for joining. Further if the purpose 
of the ccNSO is to "Nurture consensus across the ccNSO's community, 
including the name-related activities of ccTLDs" - an inclusive dialogue 
should be started amongst ALL ccTLD managers, making them feel part of a 
"good things" rather than "rail-roaded" into the unknown.

It will be difficult for many ccTLDs to organise a Board meeting to 
consider membership of the ccNSO (it is ridiculously short); the outcome 
of the US Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the 3rd September on 
"obliging" ICANN make ccTLD follow gTLD Policy (see attached letter) and 
URL on the Justice Committee hearing - will not be known .... and 
remember ccNSO membership also causes ccTLDs signing up commit to 
following ICANN's own Bylaws.

Is this not a simple ruse for those "insiders" who have been close to 
the development of the ccNSO to sign up for membership, then (almost) 
self select themselves to the Council, and then have the "hand picked" 
Council members self select 2 representatives the Board???

I urge the Launching Group - to start acting responsibly and start 
dialogue so ccTLDs can feel part of the ccNSO community - not rush 
something through by publishing an unrealistic time table which assists 
in "insider" self selection.

I want to be supporting this process but boy..... there is so much wrong 
with it..... as a wise person wrote to me privately:

The ICANN is:

"now complemented with a nice, brand new carriage solely for ccTLDs whose
(prospective) passengers don't care about the train's direction but like
how fast it's going and concentrate on who will occupy the first class
compartments and who will be appointed conductor...

Before boarding the train we need to find out which direction the train 
is moving, the cost .... and if there is sufficient railway track to 
make it to the desired destination.

IMHO it would be better to have the membership period open until 
Carthage and let (prospective) Council members present themselves in 
person, so proper evaluation of the skills of the candidate can be 
undertaken. This has two advantages i) more ccTLDs will be involved in 
the ccNSO process, ii) the best candidates will be (s)elected to the 
Council, thereby significanlty enhancing the legitimacy of the ccNSO.

Best

Paul


Chris Disspain wrote:

> The Launching Group has now published a call for membership applications.
>
> For more information and to apply please see http://ccnso.icann.org/ 
> or follow the link from ICANNís home page
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris Disspain
>

IPCpushccTLDs.pdf



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>