[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ga] RE: [wg-c] URGENT: Moratorium on all additions to con
- To: Eric.Menge@sba.gov
- Subject: RE: [ga] RE: [wg-c] URGENT: Moratorium on all additions to con
- From: "William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:48:08 -0800 (PST)
- Cc: hfeld@mediaaccess.org, kornfeld@epic.org, ooblick@netpolicy.com, hans.klein@pubpolicy.gatech.edu, amato@essential.org, jberman@cdt.org, heath@isoc.org, ssteele@eff.org, KathrynKL@aol.com, quaynor@ghana.com, apisan@servidor.unam.mx, edyson@edventure.com, apincus@doc.gov, bburr@ntia.doc.gov, amadeu@nominalia.com, announce@dnso.org, wg-b@dnso.org, wg-c@dnso.org, ga@dnso.org, matthooker@hotmail.com, rmeyer@mhsc.com, mcade@att.com
- In-Reply-To: <EFE245814159D211BC6A00805FEAECB003A7FCAF@nthq3.sba.gov>
- Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
On 22-Nov-99 Eric.Menge@sba.gov wrote:
> Mr. Walsh,
>
> I must agree with Ms. Cade regarding an extension of time for comments
> to
> respond to WG-C's Interim Report. While it is possible that the Office
> of
> Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration can respond within
> the
> 14-day comment deadline, small business owners and entrepreneurs will
> face
> significant difficulties in responding in such a short time period. I
> have
> found in the past that I am unable to solicit input from small
> businesses
> within this time period when trying to meet ICANN's deadlines.
> Advocacy believes that a 30-day period for comments is the minimum
> necessary
> to solicit comments. We will be filing comments on the record stating
> this
> and asking for a lengthening of the comment period.
Mr Menge,
That type of a delay is not what Ms Cade had in mind, but personally I
have no problem with a simple delay like you suggest. Yours is an example
of a reasonable request, whose purpose is not to excessively delay the
process of new gTLDs, but to permit a reasonable time for comments.
--
William X. Walsh - DSo Internet Services
Email: william@dso.net Fax:(209) 671-7934