[CCWG-ACCT] premature jurisdiction debates

Thu Jun 23 10:20:52 UTC 2016

So its about "control" and "technical control". Btw, how would a ccTLD control/technical control be different from a gtld control/technical control in terms of root zone administration? Just want to understand this. Thanks.

      From: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
 To: Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> 
Cc: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
 Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 1:27 PM
 Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] premature jurisdiction debates

Hi,The ccTLD and the gTLD/other TLDs records are within the ICANN root. While there are procedures that ensures a distributed control, the reality remains that the one who maintains the root has the overall "technical control" which is Verisign. The community/ICANN/ccTLD et all trust that they will continue to respect laid down process and not go out of scope.That symbolises the principle for which the internet was built upon which is trust at the middle of all our political and personal interests.Regards
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typosOn 23 Jun 2016 6:25 a.m., "Phil Corwin" <psc at vlaw-dc.com> wrote:

Appreciate your intervention, Greg. 
As you point out, my main point was that ICANN maintains an accurate root zone file (yes, with VeriSign performing the actual technical work, now under contract with the USG, soon to be under contract with ICANN) and has no control over the operation of a ccTLD. 
I stand corrected on my use of the word "control" in regard to the relationship between a national government of the country with which the particular ccTLD is associated, and this denizen of the gTLD sector looks forward to learning more about ccTLDs.

Philip S. Corwin, Founding PrincipalVirtualaw LLC1155 F Street, NWSuite 1050Washington, DC 20004202-559-8597/Direct202-559-8750/Fax202-255-6172/Cell
Twitter: @VLawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 22, 2016, at 6:45 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:

I think the more germane (and more accurate) statement of Phil's was the second part of his couplet:
ICANN maintains the root zone, it doesn't decide who performs technical and other  operations for a given ccTLD.

(Yes, actually the Root Zone Maintainer (currently Verisign) actually maintains the root zone, not ICANN.  The point is the powerlessness of ICANN to actually cause (rather than receive, verify and transmit) changes to the root.  This will be even more so when Root Zone administration is in a separate corporation (currently known as PTI).)
I know enough about ccTLD "control" to know that any generality about ccTLD control is false.  Even this one.
Greg
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Stephen Deerhake <sdeerhake at nic.as> wrote:

Greetings Phil.

You state:

> I'm not familiar with the details on that. But any nation controls its own
ccTLD.

Can you cite any statute (US or otherwise) or policy (IETF, IANA, ICANN,
etc.) that supports your claim that "...any nation controls its own ccTLD."?

Thank you.

Regards,

Stephen Deerhake
.AS Domain Registry
GDNS, LLC

-----Original Message-----
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Phil
Corwin
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 5:30 PM
To: Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net>;
accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] premature jurisdiction debates

I'm not familiar with the details on that. But any nation controls its own
ccTLD.

ICANN maintains the root zone, it doesn't decide who performs technical and
other  operations for a given ccTLD.

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/Cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message-----
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Nigel
Roberts
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 5:11 PM
To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] premature jurisdiction debates

And the redelegation of .US  . . . .

On 22/06/16 20:39, Phil Corwin wrote:
> So long as we have a common understanding of what would constitute
> "interference by the U.S. government" (of which there has been little
> to none since ICANN's inception, with the possible exception of the
> delay in .xxx delegation to the root). I presume you are advocating
> deciding upon a process to address such an occurrence, rather than
> making a decision now about an alternate jurisdiction for a situation
> that may never arise, or occur decades from now.
>
> I'll start that discussion by stating that it would likely include
> interference in ICANN's policymaking process (outside of advocacy
> within the GAC) or trying to block or compel a change in the root
> zone, through methods that are inconsistent with the Bylaws.
>
> I don't think it should include private litigation brought against
> ICANN and heard in state or federal court; or law enforcement actions,
> such as bringing an antitrust action if there is an allegation of
> illicit pricing decisions, or criminal charges against an ICANN
> employee for embezzlement, etc.
>
> *Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*
>
> *Virtualaw LLC*
>
> *1155 F Street, NW*
>
> *Suite 1050*
>
> *Washington, DC 20004*
>
> *202-559-8597/Direct*
>
> *202-559-8750/Fax*
>
> *202-255-6172/Cell***
>
> **
>
> *Twitter: @VlawDC*
>
> */"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*
>
> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Mueller, Milton L
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 3:15 PM
> *To:* Guru Acharya; Roelof Meijer
> *Cc:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* [CCWG-ACCT] premature jurisdiction debates
>
> In the reflexive approach, you would ask "what are the institutional
> mechanisms or procedures to ensure that jurisdiction issue can be
> addressed in an adverse situation where the US jurisdiction is longer
> tenable, however rare it may it?" In the absolute rarest of rare cases
> that the US legislature or judiciary try to interfere with community
> decisions (the black swan scenario), how would ICANN ensure that this
> interference is contained/minimised? What are the institutional
> mechanisms or procedures for addressing the situation where the US (or
> any other) jurisdiction is no longer hospitable/ideal for the ICANN
> policymaking or IANA functions? These are the questions that we should
> be asking in the WS2 on jurisdiction.
>
> MM: I think this is a good point. Even advocates of US jurisdiction or
> those who, like me, think there is just no better alternative and that
> the disruption and risks caused by a change are not worth the
> uncertain improvements, can easily agree that there should be
> procedures or plans for how to respond to interference by the U.S.
government.
>
> Dr. Milton L. Mueller
>
> Professor, School of Public Policy
>
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4613/12467 - Release Date:
> 06/21/16
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> 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
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4613/12467 - Release Date: 06/21/16
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
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
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
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
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/20160623/2ceba0f2/attachment-0001.html>