[NA-Discuss] Geographic Regions Statement

[Evan Leibovitch]

On 28 January 2011 14:58, Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net>wrote:


> Layer 1 and 2 (physical and link) onnectivity is more of a concern than
> layer 3 (routing) and layer 4 (DNS) services.
>

Issues about the lower levels are beyond our scope, and ICANN already has
enough problems with mission creep.

The whole point of this discussion is to address our position on what ICANN
-- and sepcifically here wrt geographic regional alignment -- can do to
better the participation of participation of indiginous end-users (amongst
others) in policy making at the DNS layer. I like Avri's wording and have
included it in the NARALO statement -- with the apparent approval of all who
have commented on it so far.

As for which region should include Mexico, Central America, Greenland, the
Caribbean, etc, I'm neutral because any stance I would take would IMO be
needless meddling. I would leave those determinations to the local
residents, while being prepared with a warm and unconditional welcome should
they wish to be a part of our region.

- Evan