[ncdnhc-discuss] Redelegation of .us Country-Code Top-Level Domain

[Jim Fleming]

"ICANN represents that it has no authority to implement new TLDs"
http://www.icann.org/tlds/correspondence/esi-v-icann-13nov00.htm 

It looks like .US is starting to move into a Proof-of-Concept phase.
http://www.dot-biz.com/Registry/Proof-Of-Concept/index.html

It does not look like .US has reliable and redundant dual IPv4 Registries.
http://www.dot-biz.com/DNS101/index.html


Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chun Eung Hwi" <ehchun at peacenet.or.kr>
To: "Jim Fleming" <jfleming at anet.com>
Cc: "NCC Discuss list (E-mail)" <discuss at icann-ncc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] Redelegation of .us Country-Code Top-Level Domain


> Dear Members,
> 
> What do you think about this?
> 
> 
> >From http://www.lextext.com/icann/index.html
> 
> 
> .US Redelegation was an "Emergency". 
> 
> No sooner had I written the item below, than this popped up on the ICANN
> web site suggesting that "ICANN authorized an emergency redelegation" of
> .us to NeuStar. Read it carefully. It's short, but speaks volumes. (and it
> doesn't change the point I made about the DOC.)  -- November 19, 2001 --
> 
> ________________________ 
> 
> Redelegation of .US Complete. 
> 
> >From all appearances, the redelegation and transition of .us from Verisign
> to Neustar is complete. The nameservers for us. now point exclusively to
> three servers maintained by NeuStar (last week the NeuStar servers were
> just three of eight nameservers in use). And, as of Friday, 16 November
> 2001, the IANA database was updated to designate NeuStar as the
> sponsoring, administrative and technical contacts. Unlike the recent
> redelegation of .au, no IANA report accompanied, much less recommended,
> this change. What this makes clear is that ICP-1 (and RFC 1591) have no
> application to the operation of the .us TLD. The implications aren't
> trivial. The U.S. Department of Commerce has retained policy authority
> over some aspects of DNS administration. And if the Department of Commerce
> has chosen to follow its own practices, and not ICANN's, when redelegating
> this particular ccTLD, why could it not do the same for creating new
> gTLDs?  -- November 19, 2001 --
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Chun Eung Hwi
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Chun Eung Hwi
> General Secretary, PeaceNet | phone:     (+82) 2- 583-3033
> Seoul Yangchun P.O.Box 81   |   pcs:     (+82) 019-259-2667 
> Seoul, 158-600, Korea       | eMail:   ehchun at peacenet.or.kr   
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
>