Re: [wg-c-1] Wecome to Drafting Committee 1

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

My opinion:

> 1.  Should there be new gTLDs?  If so, how many?

Yes. As many as there are registries to run them, provided that the
requirements to be a registry are objective, reasonable, and provide
for robustness. Make them strict, but make them fair. You'll find that
most companies won't want to get into the business, and those that do
will do it well.

> 2. If there are to be new gTLDs, should they be introduced all at one
time,
> one at a time, or in groups, and over what time period?

This is a very subjective question. Personally, I'd say one per week to make
sure that there are no serious problems. Throttle back or forward depending
on results.

> 3. Assuming that a limited number of new gTLDs is to be deployed over a
> period of time in the near future, how should ICANN select the gTLDs to be
> deployed, and the registries deploying them?  Should it consider the names
> or charters of the particular TLDs seeking authorization?  If so, what
> should the new gTLDs be?  In what order should they be introduced?  Should
> each one, or certain ones, have a specific charter? In other words, should
> some gTLDs be limited to use by certain entities, and if so should the
> limitation be mandatory?  If the limitation is to be mandatory, what
should
> be the enforcement mechanism and who should be the enforcement body?

None of the above. The registry, after meeting the criteria, is entered into
the
queue after specifying what TLD(s) they wish to run. Conflicts are settled
by
negotiation when possible, law when not. Everything else is business model,
and, presuming that the registry agrees to the criteria, are left to the
registry
to run as best it can.

> 4. What should be the mechanism for developing new gTLDs after the first
> new gTLDs are deployed?

Same as above.

The only "special case" as I see it is the (albeit not very large (!))
backlog of
prospective registries now.

They could all self-identify and queue up. Once any name conflicts are
resolved, owing to the fact that they'd be entered once per week or so,
there should be no problem with the order of entry.

It's not a hot issue. I'll prove it by putting "my company where my
mouth is:" assuming that there would be around 20 new registries, Image
Online Design would volunteer to go *LAST* with its .web registry.

Christopher