Return to cctld Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
| Username: |
tawe |
| Date/Time: |
Sun, March 19, 2000 at 3:10 AM GMT |
| Browser: |
Netscape Communicator V4.08 using Windows 98 |
| Score: |
5 |
| Subject: |
Comments on Ms. Porteneuve's and Mr. Kleinsin's Submissions |
Message: |
|
|
Good day. I was very intrigued
by some of what I read in your comment. I am concerned about the "serving the
public interest" requirement for ccTLD registrars in RFC 1591. I am uncomfortable
about the fact that ICANN/IANA is not required to examine in any detail the qualifications
that prospective registrants have to serve the public interest in a particular country
before the delegation is made. The Pitcairn Island example case is the result
of such superficial examination. IT appears from your comments that you may
share this view. Yet, I am not sure that ICANN/IANA are in a position to make
judgements about the public interest of any country. On the basis of what can
anyone make such judgements? There will always be people bound to disagree
with any standards. However, I do not think that it would be too much to impose
on a would be ccTLD registrar a requirement to publicise itself within the country
and to set up a system that would democratically determine what is of local concern
and interest to people in that country. There are, as you probably know, countries
in which the residents are not even aware that they have a registrar because the
only focus of that registrar is registring .co or other second level domain names
for profit outside the country. What do you think of this suggestion.
In addition, there are certain countries, especially in Africa, that do not have
the communication network system to support internet services. How can their
interests be known? In such situations, do you think that it will be too much for
ICANN/IANA to insist that a registrar work towards providing such service since it
is beyond doubt that access to the information super highway is in the interest of
every world citizen? I am little uncomfortable with Mr. Kleinsin's suggestion
that some ccTLDs that are obviously competing with gTLDs should be treated the same
way as the latter in future ICANN plans. Where the inhabitants of the country
have no idea that they even have a registrar, it is a bit much to just shift the
ccTLD for that country to a gTLD treatment, unless, of course there is a chance to
get another ccTLD that the inhabitants of that country can have access to on their
own terms rather than on terms dictated by a profit seeking foreign registrar.
I only recently started following the ICANN initiative and I will appreciate both
your comments, especially if I am misinformed. Thank you.
|
|
|
Message Thread:
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy