Dave, The requirement for adding and administering ccTLDs to the root was included in the original solicitation from NSF which was included by reference in the cooperative agreement. Chuck > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Crocker [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, March 19, 1999 3:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: NSI eager to open the root (was) Re: [IFWP] Excerpt of > NSI letter released in Court decision > > At 11:54 PM 3/18/99 -0500, Gordon Cook wrote: > >the root. What this meant was that the US Government Interagency > committee > >on domain names put things on indefinite hold so that the politicos could > >decide who would be allowed to to control the addition of domain names to > >the root. > > The primary reason given by the government for the directive to NSI was to > > afford NSI additional protection from anti-trust suits, by formally > documenting that NSI only responded to government directives. > > There are some anomolies to this situation, as with so many others > involving NSI. > > 1. Directives for changes to TLDs always came from IANA; NSI was and is > nothing more than an operator and they have never had any responsibility > for the content of the root zone. The letter from the US government > actually served to CHANGE the administrative model for root zone contents. > > 2. The letter from the government was quite firm and explicit. Oddly, > NSI > then proceeded to continue to add TLDs at IANA's direction, without > obtaining further approval from the U.S. government. The TLDs were all > part of the ccTLD space, and NSI's post-hoc explanation has been that this > > activity was "already" authorized under the cooperative agreement. > However > there is no documentation that substantiates this interpretation. So, the > > US government issued a restriction and NSI never got documentation for its > > otherwise independent interpretation of that restriction. > > >an NSI that was EAGER TO OPEN THE ROOT FOR COMPETITION from doing so. > > Since NSI has never had anything at all to do with decisions about root > content, their eagerness or lack of it is irrelevant, instead serving only > > as a posturing behavior. > > >Allowing the NSI to be excoriated for almost two more years as the greedy > >evil bastards who really wanted to keep the whole thing for themselves. > > Have you looked at their Wall Stree valuation lately, as well as their > closed decision-making practises? > > >After all who can forget the rabid attack leveled against NSI by EFF last > > You mean like the rabid attacks some reporters choose to lodge at others? > > d/ > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > Dave Crocker Tel: +1 408 246 8253 > Brandenburg Consulting Fax: +1 408 273 6464 > 675 Spruce Drive <http://www.brandenburg.com> > Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
