[council] Re: Preparations for Cairo: Study session on new TLD registries

[edyson@edventure.com (Esther Dyson)]

Could we/you not find  funding for  the  people you mention to come?  (if we
start quickly)  FWIW, I recently talked with someone from KPMG who wanted to
sponsor my (commercial) conference and I could see what he thought of the
idea.  (It wouldn't have  quite  the same glitz and they'd have to agre to
no-strings, but you never know...) I wonder if Alexander Ogilvy would have
any good ideas along these lines.  

Separately, I agree about putting any discussion into discrete chunks to
resolve, but one does need to consider any cross-impacts. 

Esther

At 11:58 pm 01/09/2000 -0500, Jonathan Weinberg wrote:
>	[Elisabeth -- I would be grateful if you forwarded this message to
>council@dnso.org.  Thank you.]
>
>	One of the things we've accomplished in WG-C has been to distill the
>competing views of the community (more or less) into the four broad
>positions described in the first four position papers in the WG-C interim
>report (<http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19991023.NCwgc-report.html>).
>Those four papers -- written by Kent Crispin, Caroline Chicoine, Milton
>Mueller and me -- pretty much cover folks' differing views on the myriad of
>issues encompassed within the debates on addition of new gTLDs, and they
>each do so in a cogent and clear manner.  I think it might make sense to
>begin a study session with an introduction and overview presented by
>someone of unquestioned technical expertise (say, Paul Mockapetris).  We
>could then do worse than to ask each of those four people to explain their
>opinions and rationales.  (If any of them should consider it inappropriate
>to participate, someone else could be named in that person's stead.)
>
>	One problem with this approach is that some of the people I've named are
>participating essentially pro bono, and don't have employers or clients
>paying their expenses.  This means that they may not be able to afford the
>trip to Cairo.  I'm not sure of the best way to handle this.
>
>	I agree that it would make sense also to schedule a study session on
>famous marks.  I think it would be a mistake, though, to try and roll new
>gTLDs and famous marks into one big meta-discussion.  These are two
>relatively intractable issues, and if we roll them together they'll be even
>less tractable.  I would schedule separate sessions on the two topics.
>
>Jon
>
>
>Jonathan Weinberg
>weinberg@msen.com
>
>
>
>At 04:34 PM 1/7/00 -0500, Andrew McLaughlin wrote:
>>To the Names Council:
>>
>>We've begun to plan the agenda for the ICANN Cairo meetings.  Details are
>>being posted at <http://www.icann.org/cairo2000/cairo-details.htm>.
>>
>>The preliminary agenda for the ICANN Public Forum
>><http://www.icann.org/cairo2000/cairo-details.htm#agenda> includes
>>discussion of the following topics:
>>
>>     - At Large Membership and elections
>>     - Considerations and policies relating to creation of new top-level
>>domain name registries
>>     - ccTLD delegation and administration policies
>>     - ICANN budget for 2000-2001 fiscal year
>>
>>I want to initiate a discussion with the Names Council with respect to the
>>second item:  considerations and policies relating to the creation of new
>>TLD registries.  I've already exchanged a few notes with Jonathan Weinberg
>>on the same question, and would like to include him on this discussion.
>>
>>The Board's notion is to hold a "study session" on the question of new TLDs
>>as part of the ICANN Public Forum on March 9.  The study session would
>>consist of several hours to be set aside for presentations and discussion,
>>including structured presentations by people of differing views with
>>opportunities for the Board and other attendees to ask questions and make
>>comments.  The basic idea is education:  to provide a forum in which a
>>broader audience can learn more about the merits of the debate, and about
>>the status of the DNSO's consensus-building process.   Because the session
>>will be webcast, we hope to raise general public awareness of the issue of
>>new TLDs, and to create a useful multimedia archive of the various arguments
>>for and against.  Also, it will allow the attending Board and Names Council
>>members to get better educated and to review and contribute toward the
>>consensus-building process.
>>
>>Because the question of new TLDs is squarely within the scope of the DNSO's
>>current activities, we want to structure the study session in collaboration
>>with the Names Council and Working Group C.  Jonathan Weinberg has expressed
>>to me his general support for the idea of a public study session on new
>>TLDs, and his willingness to help structure a useful and balanced set of
>>presentations.
>>
>>To get the discussion started, perhaps Jonathan might give us his thoughts
>>on how the session should be structured (and who might be good presenters).
>>
>>--Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>


Esther Dyson			Always make new mistakes!
chairman, EDventure Holdings
chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
edyson@edventure.com
1 (212) 924-8800    --  1 (212) 924-0240 fax
104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
New York, NY 10011 USA
http://www.edventure.com                    http://www.icann.org

PC Forum: 12 to 15 March 2000, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona 
Book:  "Release 2.1: A design for living in the digital age" 
High-Tech Forum in Europe: October 2000 - probably Barcelona