And it is documented: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-19nov01.htm Patricio On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Patricio Poblete <ppoblete@nic.cl> wrote:
The .us case was analyzed by the DRD WG and classified as "significantly interesting":
http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/drd-progress-report-03jun10-en.pdf(page 8)
Therefore, its absence would be a significant omission :-)
Patricio
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Dr Paulos Nyirenda <paulos@sdnp.org.mw>wrote:
Bernie, Keith,
I recall that the .us ccTLD was re-delegated round about the same time as the .mw ccTLD somewhere around 2002. However, I see that its case does not seem to show up in the tables on the FOIWG reports from pages 21 onwards.
Can you confirm if this was a deliberate omission and if there are definite reasons for leaving it out?
Would the FOIWG not be concerned if such a question arose?
If there are no documents on it then it may be a case for a new category of ND (not documented). Are there other ND cases like it?
Regards,
Paulos ====================== Dr Paulos B Nyirenda NIC.MW & .mw ccTLD http://www.registrar.mw
On 13 Oct 2011 at 1:13, Gabriella Schittek wrote:
Dear all,
The Framework of Interpretation (FoI) Working Group Interim Report is
now
open for public comments: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-12oct11-en.htm
Public comments are welcome until 1 December 2011.
The FoI Working Group is developing a "Framework of Interpretation" for the delegation and re-delegation of ccTLDs. This framework is meant to guide IANA and the ICANN Board on how to interpret the current policies and guidelines on the delegation and redelegation of ccTLDs.
This public comment period is especially seeking your input on the Working Groups's methods on their analysis of "consent".
Kind regards,
Gabi
_______________________________________________ ccnso-foiwg mailing list ccnso-foiwg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccnso-foiwg