<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Just for the sake of argument: please try and locate the .eu, .ac
and .uk ccTLDs on the ISO list. A similar argument might be made for
.tp .yu and .su yet I realize that those domains are no longer
accepting new registrations. The point is that there is some space
left for IANA/ICANN in making their decisions despite the seemingly
clear RFCs. <br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Joanna <br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">W dniu 2013-12-13 10:53, Daniel Kalchev
pisze:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:52AAD932.7020003@digsys.bg" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
Also, it is good idea to take note of 4. 2) in RFC1591, which
says:<br>
<br>
The IANA is not in the business of deciding what is and what
is<br>
not a country.<br>
<br>
The selection of the ISO 3166 list as a basis for country
code<br>
top-level domain names was made with the knowledge that ISO
has a<br>
procedure for determining which entities should be and
should not<br>
be on that list.<br>
<br>
This is relevant, because the ICANN so many here to refer as an
authority in this regard, at in fact a contractor to perform the
IANA function. The real authority is IANA, and in it's original
definition of it's TLD management policies it has said precisely
the above. That document has never been revised, it is only
interpreted from time to time (GAC Principles, the current FOI
working group at ccNSO).<br>
<br>
The US Government has in fact delegated all of the "power" over
DNS to IANA. Not impossible to influence it's decisions, but IANA
performance has always been subject to much scrutiny by the
community.<br>
<br>
Daniel<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 13.12.13 08:33, CW Mail wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BFF69F12-1A2B-4B6D-BFC8-84B0ED8D73B0@christopherwilkinson.eu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://archive.icann.org/en/committees/gac/gac-cctldprinciples-23feb00.htm">http://archive.icann.org/en/committees/gac/gac-cctldprinciples-23feb00.htm</a>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Good morning:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I suggest that those participating in this discussion read
the GAC ccTLD Principles.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>CW</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div><br>
<div>
<div>On 13 Dec 2013, at 00:25, Joanna Kulesza <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:joannakulesza@GMAIL.COM">joannakulesza@GMAIL.COM</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi everyone,<br>
<br>
</div>
as much as this is my very first post on the
list, the discussion is so riveting, I had to
chip in, with a question rather than an opinion
really. <br>
<br>
Would the ICANN "power" you were discussing not
also be visible in the delegation/redelegation
policy? Not "taking the country offline" but
redelegating the management of the ccTLD to an
entitiy more... willing to colaborate with
ICANN/US? The case that always come to my mind
when we speak about ICANN "power" over the
online reflections of state sovereignty, that is
the ccTLDs, is the 2004 Haiti case: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/01/14/haiti_kisses_icann_ring_rewarded/">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/01/14/haiti_kisses_icann_ring_rewarded/</a>
or <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/26/0138212.Just">http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/26/0138212.Just</a>
for the sake of objectivity, here's the IANA
take on the case: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.iana.org/reports/2004/ht-report-13jan04.html">http://www.iana.org/reports/2004/ht-report-13jan04.html</a>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
My question to the members of the list, should they
choose to answer it, is simple - was this a stricly
technical decision or would you consider it a
politically influenced one? Does the Haiti case
stand out? Are there any other examples of
redelegation decision viewed as controversial, like
this one? Is this a state sovereignty issue? Or not
at all? <br>
<br>
</div>
Thank you, <br>
Joanna Kulesza <br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2013/12/12 George Sadowsky <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:george.sadowsky@gmail.com"
target="_blank">george.sadowsky@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">All,<br>
<br>
Adam makes good points.<br>
<br>
I want to add something important that arises from
the case of Palestine.<br>
<br>
As you know, the ISO 3166 list, maintained by the
German National Statistical Organization, takes
its input from the Un Statistical Office (UNSO),
which has the authority to decide when an entry
should be included. I worked in the UNSO from
1973-1986, and at one point was designing a data
base for county statistics where the underlying
country structure was dynamic and changed over
time as countries merged and/or divided. The
issue was how to improve statistical analysis when
the underlying units of observation changed
composition.<br>
<br>
The specific case of Israeli statistics came up,
and I queried why Palestine was not considered to
be a statistical entity so that the statistical
profile of each entity could be more meaningful
for analytical purposes. I was told that the
decision of what was or was not a state of
territory was political and not technical, and was
communicated from the political authorities at the
UN. That is why Palestine was blocked and had to
wait until 2000 to be added to the root as a
legitimate territory.<br>
<br>
So there you have it. The UN has the ultimate
power of deciding what 'country codes' go into the
root, not the US, and the UN uses it.<br>
<br>
George<br>
<br>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br>
<br>
<br>
On Dec 12, 2013, at 8:22 AM, Adam Peake wrote:<br>
<br>
> Comment below:<br>
><br>
> On Dec 10, 2013, at 6:20 AM, Jovan Kurbalija
wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Here are a few comments in line with JK<br>
>><br>
>> So what you are saying is that the UN
could tell the US to stop<br>
>> serving the records for a ccTLD and the
US could then tell VRSN (by<br>
>> court order?) to delete that ccTLD?<br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> This potential of the U.S. deleting a ccTLD
has been worried over since the earliest days of
WSIS. But there have been wars and ccTLDs haven't
been touched (.iq/Iraq). North Korea .KP works ok
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.naenara.com.kp/en/"
target="_blank">http://www.naenara.com.kp/en/</a>>.
Palestine, .PS delegated in 2000 and redelegated
2004. U.S. hasn't edited them out of the root
zone, so it seems we shouldn't worry too much.
However, whatever we think the U.S. might do or
not do, this issue is unlikely to go away. It
might be helpful to codify what looks like de
facto policy, something like: 'The U.S. government
will not unilaterally remove any TLD from the
root.' (Write that up in nice language).<br>
><br>
> This could be one of the topics for the
meeting in Brazil next April, discussions that
might kick-off a process to develop and agree a
policy statement on root operations. Not going to
agree anything much in two days, but might be able
to agree on a charter of a working group to come
up proposals/recommendations. A working group that
reports progress and outcomes within the IGF
process: first in Istanbul a few months later,
then back to Brazil for the IGF in 2015 where any
agreement might be reviewed by a broader
community. Might make it part of a larger effort
looking at the Internationalization of the IANA,
if that's a topic for Brazil next year -- and I
think it should be one of the topics. More on
this in another email.<br>
><br>
> Adam<br>
><br>
><br>
>> JK: Sanctions cannot be adopted without
the US support. Any action under UN Chapter VII,
including sanctions, must be agreed by the all 5
permanent members of the Security Council (<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter7.shtml"
target="_blank">http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter7.shtml</a>).<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> If that is the case, and VRSN complied
(which I think they would fight<br>
>> BTW) then it would be a UN "power" and
the US would just be an agent<br>
>> of the UN?<br>
>><br>
>> JK: If the USA, like any other state,
adopts certain UN convention or policy, it has
obligation to implement it. If the USA supports
decision on sanctions against certain country, it
should implement the sanction regime.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
>
____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on
the list:<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing"
target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
><br>
> For all other list information and functions,
see:<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's
charter, see:<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
><br>
> Translate this email: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the
list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing"
target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's
charter, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Joanna Kulesza </div>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>