RE: [ga] About GA membership again......

["Roeland M. J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

The only problem I have with this is the requirement that gTLDs be shared. I
disagree. A gTLD des not have to be shared, by multiple registrars.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Simon
> Higgs
> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2000 1:34 AM
> To: ga@dnso.org; Elisabeth Porteneuve
> Subject: RE: [ga] About GA membership again......
>
>
> At 10:02 AM 3/25/00 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >I believe we have three constituencies with ex definitio restrictly
> >defined membership (and certainly restricted mailing lists):
> >    - ccTLDs are managers of current ccTLD registries
> (whereas the ccTLDs
> >      Registry Managers list is restricted to 243 members as provided
> >      by the publicly open IANA whois database, which are
> the only ones
> >      allowed to vote, the ccTLDs mailing list is much
> larger -- roughly
> >      double size -- and includes more than one contact per
> >      country/territory, as well as regional secretariat's staff)
> >    - gTLDs are managers of current gTLD registries (NSI)
>
> I'm confused by the non-NSI registries not being represented
> in Elizabeth's
> list:
>
> http://www.dnso.org/constituency/gtld/gtld.html
>
> In the the above URL, there are Open generic TLDs (.COM,
> .NET, .ORG) and
> Restricted generic TLDs (.GOV, .MIL, .EDU, .INT) - all of which are
> described as gTLDs. There is a need for an rTLD constituency for the
> restricted TLDs since they cannot be accurately described as
> generic or
> gTLDs. Generic describes a TLD which can be shared by
> multiple registrars,
> whereas Restricted describes a requirement for close-control
> by a single
> registry.
>
> >    - Registrars are, AFAIK, limited to accredited by ICANN
> Registrars
> >      for gTLDs
> >The remaining four (ISPCP, IP, NCDNH and Business) have charters
> >and published rules.
>
> I'd also like to propose that the pre-IAHC work with IANA be
> recognized,
> and that an iTLD constituency be created. Constituents can from known
> contributors to the Jon Postel new TLD/registry drafts, or other new
> TLD/registry Internet Drafts published during 1996, or are
> named on the
> iTLD applicant list that Jon Postel published on behalf of IANA to
> iahc-discuss. The purpose of the iTLD Constituency is to create new
> registries that will compete at the registry-level with NSI
> (currently no
> competition exists for gTLDs or rTLDs at the registry-level).
>
> >NB. Two (.edu, .int) of four "forgotten" TLDs are missing withing
> >     the DNSO GA, and it would be better to have them inside
> >     (the remining two are .gov and .mil).
>
> rTLDs ;-)
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Simon
>
> --
> ###
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html