RE: [ALSC-Forum] Feedback on Draft Report

[Mark Neville]

<snip>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-forum@www.atlargestudy.org
> [mailto:owner-forum@www.atlargestudy.org]On Behalf Of David Farrar
> Sent: 30 August 2001 12:37
> To: forum@atlargestudy.org
> Subject: [ALSC-Forum] Feedback on Draft Report
>
> The requirement to hold a domain name is sensible if ICANN only
> dealt with
> domain name issues.  But protocol and addressing issues affect
> every user.  For
> that matter all internet users use the domain name system also
> and have a stake
> in having it run well.  If the DNS is broke then your e-mail is
> also broke.
>
If ALSC is suggesting that only those with a 'contract' with ICANN should
have a right to ALM, then this does include everyone with an e-mail address.
Every e-mail address owner has a contract with the domain name owner, who in
turn has a contract with the registrar, who in turn has a contract with
ICANN. If domain name owners - 'one step' removed from ICANN - are to be
entitled to ALM, then why not e-mail address owners - who are 'two steps'
removed, but no less affected by ICANN decisions?

___________________________________
     Mark A Neville
     Future Perfect Corporation
     t: +27 21 409 7997
     t: +27 21 409 7026 (direct)
     c: +27 83 259 1723
     f: +27 21 409 7050
     http://www.futureperfect.co.za