RE: [nc-org] Comments on the RFP for Dot Org

[Grant Forsyth <grant.forsyth@clear.co.nz>]

Elisabeth
Thank you for kick starting this.
I support your idea of a short call with Louis on either 29/4 or 30/4 and am
available to join at either UTC=13 or UTC=20
I await the response of others and finalisation of the date/tie of the call
Regards

Grant Forsyth


-----Original Message-----
From: Elisabeth Porteneuve [mailto:Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr]
Sent: Saturday, 27 April, 2002 11:57 a.m.
To: nc-org@dnso.org
Subject: [nc-org] Comments on the RFP for Dot Org



Greetings to all,

Sorry for making your life even more overloaded,
you will find below our ToR and few items as I see it
-- your comments, corrections, modifications and idea
are very welcome. 

A. The terms of reference of this reactivated NC Dot Org TF
   has been set at the NC of 24 April 2002
   http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020424.NCteleconf-minutes.html

       Decision 2: reactivate dot ORG task Force for the single 
       task of providing comments to the NC on the Dot Org RFP.

   This action follows the ICANN Board's request to the NC
   to comment on Request for Proposal (RFP) materials for Dot ORG.
   http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-22apr02.htm

      1 May 2002 - Posting of draft Request for Proposal (RFP) 
      materials for Names Council comment and for applicants 
      to begin working on their proposals

      13 May 2002 - DNSO Names Council to provide ICANN Secretary 
      any comment on the posted materials

   The timeline for our TF has been set by the NC Chair in
   http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc10/msg00143.html
   explicitely on 8th May, which is
   "at least 5 calendar days prior to the May 13 deadline"

B. The reading of documents provided by ICANN staff for the new gTLD
   in 2000 may be of help:

   New TLD Program Application Process Archive
   http://www.icann.org/tlds/app-index.htm

   Criteria for Assessing TLD Proposals:
   http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-criteria-15aug00.htm
   Not everything is pertinent to Dot Org case, but I recomment
   (1), (8) and (9):
     1. The need to maintain the Internet's stability.
     8. Appropriate protections of rights of others in 
        connection with the operation of the TLD.
     9. The completeness of the proposals submitted and the 
        extent to which they demonstrate realistic business, 
        financial, technical, and operational plans and 
        sound analysis of market needs.

C. In order to provide comment on the RFP for the new Dot Org Registry
   we need to focus on understanding of operational elements.
   The main difference between Dot Org successor and new gTLD
   registry is that the first one must be up and running 
   to take over 3 million domain names in a very short time,
   but will not have to face any headache for sunrise.

   I would suggest to gather some facts and information 
   (when possible) about:

      Current Dot Org Registry size:
      - number of domain names, distribution of expiration data 
        per year (how many expires and when, by month) 
      - number of domain names, distribution per country of Registrant

      The staff necessary to operate an open Registry of the 
      size of 3 million of domain names. It includes to estimate 
      how many engineers, accountants, and other categories 
      of staff are required to carry out operation of that organization.

      Requirements for operations and distribution of name servers.

      Requirements for operations of whois service.

D. No doubts that the nc-org archives will be usefull,
   http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-org/Arc00/
   as well as the assotiated comments,
   http://www.dnso.org/dnso/dnsocomments/comments-dotorg/Arc01/

E. Eventually I would suggest we convene NOW, before 1st May,
   a short teleconference with Louis Touton to discuss the RFP 
   issue and have better understanding of the prepared RFP.
   I may provide the bridge.

   There are two questions: 
      do you think it is a good idea ?
      are you awailable ?
   
   If yes, the only one possible date would be Monday 29
   or Tuesday 30 April ?
   At usual time of the NC calls (13:00 UTC) ? or at 20:00 UTC ?
                                                  UTC=13  UTC=20 
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    California, USA                    UTC-8+1DST   5:00  12:00
    Washington DC, USA           (EST) UTC-5+1DST   8:00  15:00
    Florida, USA                 (EST) UTC-5+1DST   8:00  15:00
    Amsterdam, Netherland        (CET) UTC+1+1DST  14:00  21:00
    Paris, France                (CET) UTC+1+1DST  14:00  21:00
    Stockholm, Sweden            (CET) UTC+1+1DST  14:00  21:00
    Auckland, New Zealand             UTC+12+0DST  24:00   7:00 next day


Elisabeth
Dot Org TF Facilitator to start the work immediately