To: postel@ISI.EDU (Jon Postel)
From: rehred@acn2.net (rehred)
Subject: Re: [NIC-961127.4583] HT seventh-step reaction
Cc: iana@ISI.EDU, postel@isi.edu, isoc@isoc.org, lhl@cs.wisc.edu,
burack@isoc.org, heath@isoc.org, shahn@umd5.umd.edu,
archie_marshall@umail.umd.edu, george.sadowsky@nyu.edu,
pimienta@funredes.org, lanfran@bellanet.org, lanfran@yorku.ca,
jsq@mids.org, mids@mids.org, lpress@isi.edu, lgrodrig@conicit.ve,
capaid@acn2.net, martine@acn2.net, ebene@acn2.net, fdsmail@acn.com,
cohan-brd@acn.com, abruno@haitiworld.com, schillerjb@acn.com,
patrick@ht.refer.org, gstgermain@palais.acn2.net, aremy@haitiworld.com,
iana@isi.edu, domreg@internic.net, hostmaster@internic.net,
sheila.laplanche@syfed.ht.refer.org, cresfed@acn.com, secid@acn.com,
mtptc@acn2.net, gstgermain@acn2.net
Bcc: 
X-Attachments: 
In-Reply-To: 
References: 

Dear Jon,

Last friday, REHRED received the following message:


At 22:58 03/04/97 -0800, Jon Postel wrote:
>
>Hello:
>
>I am sorry if you do not understand that we have explaind to you that
>there is a rule we have adopted since RFC 1591 was published:
>
>	"Follow the expressed wishes of the government of the country
>	with regard to the domain name manager for the country code
>	corresponding to that country".
>
>We have decided that this rule takes priority.  We do not believe it is
>wise to argue with the government of a country about the TLD for that
>country.
>
>--jon.
>

As REHRED was preparing his reply, one of the institution concerned in this process, 
INAI (Schiller Jean-Baptiste) sent a message with his point of view:

>Date: Fri, 04 Apr 97 10:42:44 -0500
>From: <schillerjb@acn.com>
>To: <rehred@acn2.net>, <postel@ISI.EDU (Jon Postel)
>Subject: Re[2]: [NIC-961127.4583] HT seventh-step reaction
>
>    Jon,
>    
>     This rule mentionned is an important information, and everybody 
>should have access to the document which refer to it. If it is the 
>rule, then everybody must follow it. 
>     
>     However, I still have three little concerns :
>
>etc...

At this point, REHRED wants to formaly support the position of Schiller Jean-Baptiste. 
In addition, REHRED has to ask the following questions:

1. In what occasion you (or anybody else ) "have explaind to" us "that
there is a rule" you "have adopted since RFC 1591 was published"? To our knowledge, in all 
official correspondance, no one ever expressed such a position. It is so a little excessive 
to state that we may have not understand a rule that no one explained to us!

2. In our last message (dated march 31), we asked the IANA about a document we have been noticed:

>In what information did IANA stated that REHRED and ACN "have the backing of
>the government"? The answer to that simple question is a key piece of >information for this file, 
so we kindly insist that you provide us with that >answer.

Til now, REHRED hasen't received any response; for us, the question remain very important.


For your information: REHRED is following the process of involving the haitian government in this 
process of clarifying the situation.


With best regards.


Bernard ZAUGG
REHRED Coordinator