At 3:41 PM +1300 2/12/03, Andy Linton wrote:
I won't be able to get to the talk given by Vint Cerf at the National Library next week but I think there's some questions about US policy in relation to ICANN that someone should ask him.
Attached find some material about the Senate Communications Subcommittee and ICANN. It seems that the US view may be that just like Iraq and its oil the Internet belongs to them and that they have the right to remove this body as they please even though other national entities have signed up to the process. Perhaps Vint could comment?
[Note the reference to root name servers and DOS attacks which make this message of operational significance! (:-)]
Also note that some are asking why DoC sneaked an announcement regarding the 3 year extension of procurement of services from ICANN onto the NOAA website: http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/08/2153213&mode=thread Read the letter from Dr. Willie Black (.uk's Nominet chairman) to Nancy Victory. (Mentions IANA, so has operational significance.) -- Andrew P. Gardner barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP? We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare? Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com