[CWG-Stewardship] Fate of the .INT domain

['Andrew Sullivan']

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 04:55:03PM +0000, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> > Your argument didn't include the premise "and is run by IANA".  The
> > only actually active premise in the argument reduces to, "A
> > multistakeholder process for redelegation of a TLD is required if and
> > only if that TLD is operated by IANA."  Right?  
> 
> Completely wrong. We are discussing the fate of the .INT domain. Nothing else. 

So the analogy between INT and other domains is completely
inoperative, then, and any argument about how it is or is not covered
by ICANN processes is just irrelevant?  I guess I don't understand.

Anyway, as long as the text about this is the minimal one
(i.e. without the problematic "immediately" I noted), I'm ok with it.
I've been arguing for "as little as possible" on this and other
peripheral topics for some time now.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com