On 10/18/2017 07:07 AM, SM wrote:
Why was ICANN country members or country code domain registrars chosen in the above?
Anything of this scope would be like the WIPO Internet Treaties, and would be a big deal: in the US it would require ratification by Congress. It would bind any country signing such a treaty, and presumably this would eventually supersede ICANN. The most recent attempt to formulate such an Internet treaty featured a controversial proposal from a group that included China, Russia, Sudan, and others. These countries wanted to manage the IANA, and presumably this would have included managing the tzdb project. It would have meant for a lot more politics and bureaucracy for tzdb. Had this happened, I probably would have moved the tzdb project to a safer home outside IANA. Luckily, saner heads prevailed and the draft treaty went down in flames. Where treaties are concerned, be careful what you wish for. For more, see: Garber M. How the UN's 'game-changing' Internet treaty failed. The Atlantic 2012-12-14. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/12/how-the-uns-game-chan...