At 06:18 PM 4/26/99 , Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jay Fenello writes:
>>
>> At 04:45 PM 4/26/99 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >> I really becoming concerned with your seemingly recent problems being
>> >> able to grasp reality. I hope you are having this examined and take
>> >> care of, the effects could be quite serious.
>> >
>> >In this case, Dr. Lisse is in good company. If you want to claim that
>> >com.au or per.nu are ccTLDs, feel free to do so. But don't expect to be
>> >taken *seriously* if you claim that com.au or per.nu are ccTLDs.
>>
>
>> The question is not whether they are ccTLDs, the question is whether
>> they should be represented in the ccTLD constituency.
>
>They may be ccSLDs.
>
>> FWIW, I can't think of a good reason why they shouldn't.
>
>They don't belong. The ccTLD constituency is for the country Top Level
>Domain Managers (=Registries).
>
>Form a ccSLD, gSLD or even SLD constituency and apply for seats on the
>Names Council.
Again, we disagree.
The sub-delegated zone registries for .com.au
and .per.nu (the former which is certainly much
larger than .NA) need to have a say in the DNSO.
Given the seven constituencies as defined by
ICANN, the ccTLD constituency is the only place
they currently fit.
Jay.
