[CCWG-ACCT] RES: Jurisdiction Proposed Questions and Poll Results

Alberto Soto asoto at ibero-americano.org
Thu Dec 29 23:58:46 UTC 2016


I know I have no opinion here because I am only a participant, but I dare to comment quickly.

I agree with Seun, and there is no need to defend or attack an opinion or trend.

To propose change of jurisdiction, and I agree with previous opinions, it is necessary to analyze many items. For example, contract with Verisign and change the Root DNS, or would they remain in the United States? What are the implications of this? Should the jurisdiction of replicated servers be reviewed? How would DNS integrity, stability, security, and reliance be affected?

If we change jurisdiction, how do we ensure how the new jurisdiction over. Africa or about .america will decide, or about any other similar domain? Should we change jurisdiction with the discussion of each domain?

What is the suggested jurisdiction and that meets all the necessary?

 

Best Regards

 

Alberto Soto

 

De: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] En nombre de Kavouss Arasteh
Enviado el: Thursday, December 29, 2016 7:59 PM
Para: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
CC: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Asunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] RES: Jurisdiction Proposed Questions and Poll Results

 

Dear Seun,

You put many words together but that has nothing to do with Jurisdiction .

Just an incoherent approach .

Please clearly describe your idea which camp do you defend pls ?

No change ? 

Or address  the  sensitive jurisdiction .

Can you tell me what the business of the US Court to decide on . afarica.:

You are African and must normally defend that people.

Why a UIS COURS is expected to decide on the interest of African People in deciding whether it is the intestats of African to delegate the string to Applicant 1 or applicant 2 .

Why not an African or international court should decide on the case.

Regards

Kavouss 

 

2016-12-29 23:22 GMT+01:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> >:

While I also share same question with Martin, I don't think it may be too early to give a definite response as you seem to have provided Milton as I guess that is what the question 4 seem to be all about. Unless we are already trying to process the questions before administering them.

 

Hence I also look forward to what comes up as responses to that question even though I have feeling that it's gonna cost volunteer time and legal fees :)

 

Cheers!

Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

 

On 29 Dec 2016 23:03, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu <mailto:milton at gatech.edu> > wrote:



> -----Original Message-----
> I have read a number of the mails on this issue, but had not been following the
> prior discussion.  Is there anything that I can read that does an analysis of
> specific issues related to the jurisdiction and how these might be addressed in
> different jurisdictions?

No, there isn't. We are still debating whether and how to send out questions asking people about this.
Join the fun on the jurisdiction subgroup list!
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community


_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20161229/0b338b25/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list