[NA-Discuss] NA-Discuss Digest, Vol 9, Issue 58 Re: Why the NARALO should stop wasting time arguing about

Thu Jul 26 10:30:19 EDT 2007

I agree with all of you, and occasionally with myself.

I don't think it's really out of scope.  Could we compose a short-list of
concerns and discuss from there?   Danny is already at work on it and could
possibly provide a good synopsis.  I think after we take a look at certain
things we should decide from there.

If we were talking about redelegation of AfriNIC, yah that's not within our
(NARALO) scope at all.  But I would understand if our African counterparts
had concerns.

Randy Glass
A at L

On 7/18/07, Seth M. Reiss <seth.reiss at lex-ip.com> wrote:
>
> ccTLDS are subject to the policies and politics of the country to which
> the
> TLD has been delegated.  gTLDs are subject to the policies and politics of
> ICANN, including the various indivduals, industries, trade organizations,
> commercial interests, and goverments that make their opinions felt.
>
> While considering the manner govenrments regulate ccTLDs can be
> instructive
> for ICANN and its constituencies, and ICANN policies may want or need to
> take into account what countries do with their ccTLDs, I do not believe
> that
> ICANN and its consituencies should be seeking to affect the manner in
> which
> ccTLDs are regulated.  Those who form a part of ICANN but who have an
> interest in the manner in which a government regulates its ccTLD should
> express those interest in the context of national or international forums
> that are not dedicated to the work of ICANN.  Otherwise, things become
> confused and may be miscontrued.
>
> Seth
> -----Original Message-----
> From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of
> na-discuss-request at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 6:00 AM
> To: na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Subject: NA-Discuss Digest, Vol 9, Issue 58
>
> Send NA-Discuss mailing list submissions to
>        na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica
> nn.org
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        na-discuss-request at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        na-discuss-owner at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
> "Re: Contents of NA-Discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re:  Why the NARALO should stop wasting time arguing about
>      .US (Evan Leibovitch)
>   2. Re:  Why the NARALO should stop wasting time arguing      about
>      .US (Michael Maranda)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 09:57:14 -0400
> From: Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>
> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Why the NARALO should stop wasting time
>        arguing about   .US
> To: Michael Maranda <mmaranda at afcn.org>
> Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> Message-ID: <469E1C3A.9020402 at telly.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Michael Maranda wrote:
> > No, it isnt NARALO's business as a whole, but I welcome opportunity to
> > learn from Canadian experience and policy and to that extent it is a
> > great opportunity for NARALO to work together for mutual benefit.  I
> > am thankful for Canadian input on this.
> We need to learn from each other.
>
> I need to defer to the American members of this list whether it is a
> valuable use of our resources (ie, our time!) to define and publicize a
> policy or reaction related to the .us contract. If this is something that
> NARALO's US participants believe is important, I'm prepared to stand
> behind
> that -- just as I'd hope they'd support us Canadians should something of
> relevance happen up here.
>
> Danny said this is important, this is upsetting, and that we ought to
> react.
> John said that, regardless of its importance, it's out of the realm of
> ICANN
> and thus a waste of NARALO's time. I guess maybe you're both right.
>
> Our position within ICANN gives us access to information about namespace
> issues, that may allow us to better react and be better aware. (After all,
> how many groups out there are watching such activities to protect the
> interest of the public?) Having said that, John's right  -- if it's out of
> our direct realm of influence, NARALO is probably best to just gain wisdom
> from the information but not to make much noise about it.
>
> As someone who believes in the "keep the core neutral" campaign, I agree
> that it's important not to force -- or even pressure -- ICANN to be more
> than it is. Having said that, I appreciate Danny's efforts in this regard
> and wonder if there is any role we can play in raising public awareness.
> Maybe we're not the ones to hold the .us registry accountable
> -- but if not ICANN, then who?
>
> - Evan
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:37:01 -0500
> From: "Michael Maranda" <mmaranda at afcn.org>
> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Why the NARALO should stop wasting time
>        arguing about .US
> To: "Evan Leibovitch" <evan at telly.org>
> Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <3feff8d60707180837g7438411p3b86fa2e3d22106a at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I'm appreciative of your time and welcome Canadian views as we struggle to
> deal with various issues south of the border.
>
> I dont view our activity as wasting time or arguing  (particularly in this
> instance)
>
> -MM
>
> Evan said:
>
> > I need to defer to the American members of this list whether it is a
> > valuable use of our resources (ie, our time!) to define and publicize
> > a policy or reaction related to the .us contract. If this is something
> > that NARALO's US participants believe is important, I'm prepared to
> > stand behind that -- just as I'd hope they'd support us Canadians
> > should something of relevance happen up here.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org/
> attachments/20070718/f3216e6c/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica
> nn.org
>
>
> End of NA-Discuss Digest, Vol 9, Issue 58
> *****************************************
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> ---
> Draft MoU with ICANN:
> http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU
>
> Draft Operating Principles:
> http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP
>
> Draft Code of Conduct:
> http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct
>

-- 
-------------------------
AmericaAtLarge.org
RJPacific.com
DDMF.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20070726/5929b5e4/attachment-0001.html 