At 03:16 25/07/2006, todd glassey wrote:
By the way - what State's or Country's laws are the IETF's documents
governed under and why is this not in any of the IETF's documents including
the Solicitation RFP itself??? My favorite is the Affidavit which comes
with a perjury clause in it with no statement of who's perjury laws were
being used? US? Virginia? California? who's ???
Dear Todd,
this is a key point for the future of the Internet standardisation
and governance process (to enter MoU outside of the ICANN/ISOC
family, and permit interoperability, the point must be clearified).
Unfortunately Brian refuses to answer it. This leaves with the only
possibilty of a Justice action. The problem is its cost, hence the
incentive for a structure having the capacity to carry it. The
langtag issue will definitly provide it. My hope is that it can
deliver the answer before the IGF process consolidates the digital
ecosystem standardisation process under a de facto or formal ITU-I.
Obviously the end of the WTO Doha process will not help reducing the
balkanization creep.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf