AW: Mapping?

[Debbie Garside]

Alex wrote:

>>ccTLDs are typically not contractually bound to ICANN.

This is true but somewhere along the line someone is contractually bound to
the domain name holder.  If ICANN/IETF issue any directive for the
safety/security/implementation of domain names and the TLD (g or cc) ignores
it, then they are liable to their customers for knowingly selling them a
domain name that MAY not work consistently.  I think they would follow any
directive in their own interests.

Best regards

Debbie

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexander Mayrhofer [mailto:alexander.mayrhofer at nic.at] 
Sent: 03 December 2009 16:00
To: debbie at ictmarketing.co.uk; Andrew Sullivan; Georg Ochsner
Cc: Michael Everson; IDNA update work
Subject: RE: AW: Mapping?

> In which case, if ICANN/IETF sent out a directive to registries that
> bundling should occur for a set time period do you think this would a.
> alleviate the problem and b. facilitate ß within 
> implementations (including
> certificates)?

ccTLDs are typically not contractually bound to ICANN.

Alex


Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 15/05/2009
06:16
 

Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 15/05/2009
06:16