[governance] UN controls the country code part of the Internet root, not US

[George Sadowsky]

Thank you, Mawaki.  The subject line is correct in one sense and misleading in others; I should have been more precise, but I was reacting quickly to some other post -- can't remember whose -- which claimed very exaggerated powers for ICANN.

It is correct that the UN controls the time of entry of any entity into ISO 3166, and that there are almost certain to be political considerations in determining when such an event occurs.   I know that from first hand experience.  To make up a mythical example, if the People's Republic of China's  2- and 3-letter codes had been in ISO 3166, and the Chinese Nationalists would then have retreated to Formosa/Taiwan. I m sure that .tw would not exist today.  Talk with the folks in the western Sahara.   I don't remember what the Eritrea story was, it might be interesting to review it.

George 

 
On Dec 19, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote:

> Re. the subject line and the very thrust of the first message in this thread, my first thought right away (a week ago as the message came in) was that George was being too cute/clever by half (Note: please choose between 'cute' and 'clever' which is more respectful than the other, as my familiarity with that idiom is probably limited compared to that of a native English speaker, thanks.) I don't know where the need to make that point came from (from the message content, it looks like coming out of nowhere), and there we were again with another unnecessary conversation started with a message on the defensive and which might very well result in yet another exercise of cross finger-pointing. So I disengaged... until today. 
> 
> The reasoning by which anyone would get to the conclusion that UN controls ccTLDs in the DNS root because they have had a process (in place well before the Internet) to decide on two-letter codes to represent geographical entities for their own purposes different from the DNS management is beyond my thinking ability. Someone in the early Internet technical community (Jon Postel, if my information is correct) decided to rely on that list for the DNS purposes without the UN playing any deliberate role in that specific decision. In my realm of rationality, the UN cannot bear any responsibility for any consequence that might ensue from that specific decision concerning the DNS. That's really a stretch to make a defensive point -- and again, I'm not even sure we needed to have that debate at this point.
> Thanks,
> 
> Mawaki   
> 
> -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
> Mawaki Chango, PhD                                
> Founder & Principal, DIGILEXIS Consulting
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com
> Mobile: +225 4448 7764
> twitter.com/digilexis
> twitter.com/dig_mawaki
> Skype: digilexis
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:
> The ISO codes were adopted as any other could have been adopted, not by
> a treaty or formal agreement with ISO. Milton is correct.
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> On 12/19/2013 03:10 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> > Milton,
> >
> > On Dec 19, 2013, at 8:42 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> >> The UN does NOT control the "country code part" of the DNS root.
> >> A UN agency makes up two-letter alphabetic character strings and uniquely assigns them to geographic entities (which are not necessarily "countries" by the way). When or how those codes get into the DNS root and matched to an IP address is entirely in the hands of ICANN/IANA, which means that it ultimately has to be approved by the US government.
> >
> > Not entirely.
> >
> > ICANN/IANA does not make unrequested changes.
> >
> > In the past (before the root zone automation software), anyone could request a change to a TLD. ICANN/IANA would vet the change request, ensuring the request came from an entity authorized to request the change (that is, it came from one of the TLD administrators) and that it made sense syntactically and technically, then seek confirmation from all the administrators (technical and administrative) for the TLD.  Once all parties approved the change request, it would be sent on to NTIA for authorization and then on to Verisign for implementation.
> >
> > I believe the root zone automation software now limits who can request changes to the TLD administrators (that is, the folks who have log in credentials to the system), but not positive. My understanding is that everything else in the process is essentially the same.
> >
> >> Furthermore, there is no such thing as a "country code part of the Internet root." There is a DNS root, full stop.
> >> A country code is a top level domain just like any other, in technical terms.
> >
> > Yes. From the perspective of IANA staff, a TLD is a TLD.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -drc
> >
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20131219/ca115af7/attachment.htm>
-------------- 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