[address-policy-wg] Re: [anti-spam-wg] Fwd: Re: Re: NCC#2007083003 Fwd: DELIVERY FAILURE:

der Mouse wrote:
>> The scope of this problem is much larger than ICANN or the Internet.
>> We need to press for the same application of power against
>> communication abusers by the equivalent authorities who assign
>> telephone numbers and postal addresses.
> 
> I don't think so.  In neither case is there the same kind of mismatch
> between authority and responsibility.
> 
> In the case of telephone numbers, the delegated-to entities (the
> telcos) do take the responsibility - they don't ignore abuse.  Filing


They have specific statutory rights and obligations as carriers, not as 
registrars. (Note, for example, that number portability now nicely separates 
the registration function from carriage.)

A domain registrar is not the carrier of content.


> In the case of postal addresses, there is no intermediate layer - the
> same entity that is the top-level manager is also the bottom-level
> manager

Actually, that's not correct.

The post office assigns postal units, typically aligned with city/town 
boundaries and subdivided by postal code/zip code.  But they do not define 
city/town boundaries and they do not assign street names or numbers.

Again, carriage is distinguished from registration.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net