From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@linux.lisse.na>

To: NTIADC40.SMTP40("el@lisse.NA")

Date: 8/31/98 2:52am

Subject: Re: Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern

Ms SMith,

In message <199808301910.UAA28635@linux.lisse.na>, Dr Eberhard W Lisse writes:

> In message <9808301209.AA721974@mail.nu>, "J. William Semich \(NIC JWS7\)" writes:

>

> > I would like to bring your attention to a potentially dangerous and erroneous assumption you > > appear to have made in question number 8 in the "Questions for Public Comment" in THE

> > DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND

> > INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, Docket No. 980212036-8172-03, "Request for

> > Comments on the Enhancement of the .us Domain Space."

>

> The NA domain concurs (very strongly) with the position of the NU domain.

>

> Further to the arguments advanced by Mr Semich this position might be counterproductive

> with regards to freedom of speech, democratization ond opening of markets.

I forgot to mention due process.

el

--

Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse\ / Swakopmund State Hospital

<el@lisse.NA> * | Resident Medical Officer

Private Bag 5004 \ / +264 81 1246733 (c) 64 461005(h) 461004(f)

Swakopmund, Namibia ;____/ Domain Coordinator for NA-DOM (el108)

CC: NTIA.NTIAHQ(krose,ksmith,kkirchgasser,usdomain),NT...

###

From: Jim Higgins <jhiggins@netedge.co.nz>

To: NTIADC40.SMTP40("el@lisse.NA")

Date: 8/31/98 5:23am

Subject: Re: Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern

Ms Smith

The Internet Society of New Zealand (manager of .nz) very strongly supports Mr Semich and Dr Lisse in their comments. It is not possible for the US to prescribe to independent nation states how they should or shouldn't manage their country code domains. Such an approach will be resisted vigorously by .nz

Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:

>

> Ms Smith,

>

> In message <9808301209.AA721974@mail.nu>, "J. William Semich \(NIC JWS7\)" writes:

>

> > I would like to bring your attention to a potentially dangerous and erroneous assumption you > > appear to have made in question number 8 in the "Questions for Public Comment" in THE

> > DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND

> > INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, Docket No. 980212036-8172-03, "Request for

> > Comments on the Enhancement of the .us Domain Space."

>

> The NA domain concurs (very strongly) with the position of the NU domain.

>

> Further to the arguments advanced by Mr Semich this position might be counterproductive

> with regards to freedom of speech, democratization ond opening of markets.

>

> el

> --

> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse\ / Swakopmund State Hospital

> <el@lisse.NA> * | Resident Medical Officer

> Private Bag 5004 \ / +264 81 1246733 (c) 64 461005(h) 461004(f)

> Swakopmund, Namibia ;____/ Domain Coordinator for NA-DOM (el108)

--

Regards

Jim Higgins Phone 04)472 9949

Managing Director The Networking Edge Ltd Fax 04)385 9511

Chairman, The Internet Society of NZ Mob 021 963 268

P O Box 5275, WELLINGTON jhiggins@netedge.co.nz

http://www.netedge.co.nz

CC: NTIA.NTIAHQ(krose,ksmith,kkirchgasser,usdomain),NT...

###

From: Jose Soriano <js@rcp.net.pe>

To: NTIADC40.SMTP40("william@tjns.tj")

Date: 8/31/98 10:08am

Subject: Re: Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern

The .PE NIC concur with Mr Semich and Dr Lisse in their arguments in the previous messages in the strongest way.

js

CC: "Arturo =?UNKNOWN-8BIT?Q?Brice=F1o"?= <Abriceno@os...

###

From: Jose Soriano <js@rcp.net.pe>

To: NTIADC40.SMTP40("el@lisse.NA")

Date: 8/31/98 10:18am

Subject: Re: Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern

Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:

>

> Ms Smith,

>

> In message <9808301209.AA721974@mail.nu>, "J. William Semich \(NIC JWS7\)" writes:

>

> Further to the arguments advanced by Mr Semich this position might be counterproductive

> with regards to freedom of speech, democratization ond opening of markets.

The better way to ensure natural monopoles, not freedom of speech, and not democratisation is to use this arguments to empower only the biggest companys against the networks. We see in Buenos Aires all the biggest oposed to the participation of the Latin America ccTLDs in the Board, and we see everywere how we have a big problem because the .US is not explicite.

js

js

--

"La unica cosa importante de la vida es mostrar fidelidad al honor de estar vivo."Lobo Antunez

CC: NTIA.NTIAHQ(krose,ksmith,kkirchgasser,usdomain),NT...

###

From: "Sam Taufao" <sam.taufao@ffa.int>

To: NTIADC40.SMTP40("jhiggins@netedge.co.nz","el@lisse...

Date: 8/30/98 6:52pm

Subject: Re: Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern

What sort of government involvement is envisaged in this whole process? In Pacific island countries, any efforts on issues as significant as what we are discussing which government feels has bypassed or circumvented their authorities will quickly be alienated. This is especially true of the current discussions where there is limited if any representation from Pacific island countries. Part of the problem is theirs but as yet, they have not been Internet-enabled or made aware of these things so that they can make their views known. I am having to remind some ccTLD administrators over the phone to get their positions on some of these issues.

It seems to me that some form of government involvement or say in ccTLDs is one way to accommodate national control without getting too bogged down with trying to dictate developments in Internet. It would help the late starters get their house in order once they are in a position to do so, when they become familiar with the issues and believe the time is right to take control of their own ccTLD.

Thank you.

CC: NTIA.NTIAHQ(krose,ksmith,kkirchgasser,usdomain),NT...

###

From: <ppoblete@dcc.uchile.cl>

To: NTIADC40.SMTP40("bsemich@mail.nu")

Date: 8/31/98 11:04am

Subject: Re: Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern

[">" = J. William Semich \]

>

> The current ccTLD registries are not, either as a matter of law or of Internet standards (RFCs), > explicitly "accountable to national governments". In RFC 1591, the current document that

> explains how country code registries should be delegated and what the delegated ccTLD

> registries' responsibilities should be, no mention of the word "government" is made.

I believe the US Government is misinformed about this issue. The matter of the authority a local government has on the respective ccTLD is far from clear, and it is certainly dangerous to assume that it is.

In fairness, it should be mentioned that IANA has said (not in an RFC):

"An additional factor has become very important since RFC 1591 was written: the desires of the government of the country. The IANA takes the desires of the government of the country very

seriously, and will take them as a major consideration in any transition discussion. " <http://www.iana.org/cctld-news1.html>

but this is a long way from saying that ccTLDs are currently "accountable to national governments".

In earlier messages I have argued against ignoring the pressure that there may be from some sectors of the community to get the national governments involved. But the US Government document under discussion seems to have taken the extreme opposite view, and I disagree with that too.

Patricio Poblete

NIC Chile

CC: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain,kkirchgasser,ksmith,krose),NT...

###

From: E D Danielyan <edd@aic.net>

To: NTIADC40.SMTP40("ppoblete@dcc.uchile.cl")

Date: 8/31/98 11:53am

Subject: Re: Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern

Dear Patricio:

> I believe the US Government is misinformed about this issue. The matter of the authority a

> local government has on the respective ccTLD is far from clear, and it is certainly dangerous to > assume that it is.

While I agree with the above statement, it is necessary to define the words and concepts used. Word "authority" has a special meaning in law. Without touching sensitive points like relations between the countries and relations between the countries and international organizations like ISO, it is understood that courts of particular jurisdiction have jurisdiction over all persons and property physically located on the territory of said jurisdiction (ie. country) with rare exceptions. However, IANA, or Dr. Postel, are not subject to laws of particular country, nor the ISO is subject to such laws. I think we too often speak about law and legal issues without actually considering issues from legal viewpoint, which, at least, is misleading.

> In fairness, it should be mentioned that IANA has said (not in an RFC):

>

> "An additional factor has become very important since RFC 1591 was written: the desires of

> the government of the country. The IANA takes the desires of the government of the country > very seriously, and will take them as a major consideration in any transition discussion. "

> <http://www.iana.org/cctld-news1.html>

>

> but this is a long way from saying that ccTLDs are currently "accountable to national

> governments".

Again, what do you mean by accountable? The operators or managers of ccTLD of a particular country located on the territory of that country are subject to laws of that country. And if "national government" doesn't want someone to do something with the ccTLD, it has absolute right to act in accordance with the law of the state in question and in accordance with the applicable conventions or treaties. The ccTLD operators without doubt are accountable to the national government because the operator has to respect laws of the state he is domiciled in.

> In earlier messages I have argued against ignoring the pressure that there may be from some

> sectors of the community to get the national governments involved. But the US Government

> document under discussion seems to have taken the extreme opposite view, and I disagree with > that too.

Well, I am sure that *government* should not be involved *heavily*, but it doesn't mean that the Internet or people involved with the Internet are exempt from the duty to respect law. The question of whether the law is good or bad, wise or stupid, is another question. I see tendency of

considering the Internet as something which is outside the scope of the law because (in most countries) there is no specific Internet-related legislation - THAT'S WRONG. To conclude, let me repeat that I am against control or even supervision of Internet by national governments, but current discussions about whether the Internet is subject to law or not are not serious.

Greetings

Edgar

CC: NTIA.NTIAHQ(krose,ksmith,kkirchgasser,usdomain),NT...

###

From: Jerry Adams <ms188530@pop.mindspring.com>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/31/98 5:59pm

Subject: Use of domain addresses under .us

Mr. and Mrs. Donn, teachers with one of the best sites on history on the Web, made the following two excellent suggestions on how to use the space under .us:

How about every school in the U.S. be assigned web space at .us! That way, schools do not have to wait until they can find free room available through their county or state!

And perhaps some way to post online via a "school server".

(Their site address is http://members.aol.com/donnandlee/index.html)

CC: NTIADC40.SMTP40("DonnandLee@aol.com")

###

From: <ppoblete@dcc.uchile.cl>

To: E D Danielyan <edd@aic.net>

Date: 8/31/98 12:18pm

Subject: Re: Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern

Dear Edgar,

I basically agree with you. As a resident of Chile, I am subject to Chilean law and accountable for what I do. But currently I am *not* especially accountable to the government of Chile for what I do in my duty of administrator of the .CL domain.

Of course, this could all change if a law was passed, regulating the operation of the .CL domain. If that were to happen, my opinion is that we should comply with that law. I am aware that some of my colleagues around the world feel that a local government would have no right to enact such a law, but I do not subscribe to their view.

Patricio Poblete

NIC Chile

CC: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain,kkirchgasser,ksmith,krose),NT...

###