[governance] [liberationtech] Chinese preparing for a "Autonomous Internet" ?

[David Conrad]

C.a.,

On Jun 24, 2012, at 11:32 PM, c.a. wrote:
> David, the only relevant "RFC" in the .iq case was a determination from the USG for Icann to suspend the domain.

An interesting view given the thrust of this discussion to date. To be clear, IANA is required to follow policies dictated by RFC 1591/ICP-1 and the "oversight" role of the USG in root management is to ensure ICANN/IANA staff has indeed followed those policies.

Out of curiosity, why do you believe ICANN (or the USG) "suspended" the .iq domain?  My understanding (again, before my time at ICANN so I may be misinformed) was that the folks Postel delegated the domain to didn't do anything with it and got in trouble for violating US law when living in the US. When a redel request came in, it was not possible for IANA staff to establish the wishes of the Internet community in Iraq as required by RFC 1591/ICP-1 and as a result, were required by those documented policies to not make any changes.  Do you have different information about the .IQ case?

Regards,
-drc


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t