Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050703145300.0523cd70@mail.afrac.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 17:15:32 +0200
To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>, <ltru@ietf.org>
From: r&d afrac <rd@afrac.org>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] IANA ISO 3166 related Registries
In-Reply-To: <000601c57f86$1e9edc80$7f1afea9@oemcomputer>
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050703025830.04a12060@pop.online.fr>
	<000601c57f86$1e9edc80$7f1afea9@oemcomputer>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: 
Precedence: list
Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org

At 06:17 03/07/2005, Randy Presuhn wrote:
> > The position adopted by the USA concerning the control of the root file
>
>What position in what forum are you talking about?

Sorry, due to its importance I expected this information was known to 
everyone. I sent the URL in another mail.

>Is this in conjunction with your http://intlnet.org/eadmin.htm project?
>Who would be the liaison contact for the IETF?

as previously explained ICANN published the ICP-3 document. IETF 
disregarded the call. Intlnet carried this experimentation along with the 
ICANN guidlines (named dot-root). This permitted to identify both the needs 
(as the USA do today) and ways to address them. We incorporated AFRAC to 
explore the solutions we identified. The architectural stability of the 
world digital ecosystem and the end to end principle call for (at least) 
the national distribution of the reference sources (IANA): Common 
Refeference Centers. The NICSO has the mission to advise Govs, ccTLDs and 
National Internet Communities over the transition.

> > consensus is that every IANA Registry using ISO 3166 codes will be from now
>
>The consensus of whom?

The people I polled who are involved in the study/project of a CRC projects 
interested in the AFRAC work.

> > on deemed representing an US position, unless it is transferred to the
> > ICANN IANA zone, on such case the authority should be the GAC. The
>
>The logic of how the use of an ISO international standard could be construed
>as representing a US position completely eludes me.

Read the US Statement of Principles.

> > consensus is that generally the US point of view on local culture does bear
>
>I'm curious to learn what this "US point of view on local culture" is
>and where (and by whom) this weighty pronouncement was made.

the many who would like to know it!


> > enough weight to be worth the continuation of the effort engaged since
> > December. Also it is that priority will be given to the root files and that
> > any organisation proposing a distributed IANA copy will support the langtag
> > Registry decided by its own Culture Ministry.
>
>I don't think the US even has a Culture Ministry.

This is precisely the problem :-)

>If there is one, it goes by some other name and keeps a *very* low profile.

You may know that in many countries of the world, this Ministry is a key 
one. What is really a problem is that ietf-languages may consider deciding 
anything about languages and countries without involving these Ministries. 
And that this Draft does not consider them.

> > It is also agreed that the US position should be read as a support of the
>
>Agreed by whom?

By some who have the capacity to do it and that the US position 
acknowledges as in charge, as far as it has been quickly discussed 
evaluated. There is no reason to think ohers would see it differently: they 
share the same interests as the US Governments, within the frame of their 
own culture and policies. Obviously now the international community is to 
organise its intergovernance.

With the hope that this WG will cease to be one of its problem.  The USA 
considered their critical infrastructure but also the American way of life 
(http://whitehouse.gov/pcipb) . Other countries consider also the same 
their language and culture. This WG will obviously not be an international 
problem, but certainly its Registry will be a reason for national 
alternative-IANA, based on the international community solutions (ISO).

jfc


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru