[NA-Discuss] Summary Minutes NARALO Call 14 February 2011

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

>> Danny: The GAC thinks that they can veto so many things about ICANN and
>> this
>> is unacceptable to At Large.

At present, all new registries are blocked, in fact.

The hypothetical of a loss of access through the specific intervention 
of ICANN actors directed at a specific application is difficult to 
compare with the actual loss of access through the general 
intervention of ICANN actors directed at all applications.

Just here in North America, where Indians have tried to get access, 
either to a unallocated 3166 code point, or to an allocated but unused 
3166 code point, or to a gtld string, since the mid-1980s, and 
significant regions and demographics are unserved or underserved by 
network access at speeds greater than 56k, and are only served by 
for-profit name space operators, there are unmet, non-hypothetical needs.

I never hope to be more than a minority of one, but the absence of any 
vehicle for Indians, and others, to replicate what the Catalans have 
managed, and for less than $50,000, troubles me a lot more than the 
GAC or the USG potentially "vetoing" an application for an Indian or 
other registry.

Obviously, I don't share the sentiment to which this comment is a 
comment upon.

Eric