Re: [wg-c] Let's work on...

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

Absolutely unacceptable.

Why select the pool ahead of time? Who decides which registries get
to apply? What are the criteria?

In short, you're going about this backwards. Don't select TLDs and then
let registries select who gets to run them. Instead, select registries based
on objective criteria and THEN decide the TLDs.

You're putting the cart before the horse.

--
Christopher Ambler
Personal Opinion Only, of course
This address belongs to a resident of the State of Washington
who does not wish to receive any unsolicited commercial email
----- Original Message -----
From: Javier SOLA <javier@aui.es>
To: <wg-c@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 2:18 PM
Subject: [wg-c] Let's work on...


> Ivan,
>
> Let's move on.
>
> It is clear that we are not going to reach an agreement on gTLD strings. I
> believe that your proposal is the best at this time. Let's work on how to
> choose gTLDs.
>
> Here is a rough first approach.
>
> We need to define:
>
> 1) Who decides
> 2) Methodology
>
> 1)
>    a)   Ideally, who decides should be the whole of Internet users, but
> this is sort of complicated.
>    b) The next step would be all those interested enough to check a web
> page and take a vote.
>    c) A third possibility would be to consult with those involved in the
> process, that is, the DNSO.
>
> The complication I see with b) is the usual one. We do want to avoid
> capture and therefore voters must be clearly identified. We do not want
> voting engines pushing a specific string.
>
> I tend to think that c) is the best. The DNSO is supposed to be deciding
> policy, it can also be the source of decision on names of new gTLDs.
>
> 2) Methodology.
>
> We should follow a process slightly more complicated than just plain
> voting. I believe that we could have proposals, followed by discussion and
> finally a vote.
>
> The method for the vote needs to be decided on. It should give, as a
> result, some sort of priority to some new gTLDs, for them to be put in the
> root earlier than others if there is a decision on slow deployment.
>
> A voting process could select a set of say... 5 to 15 gTLDs, in a given
> order. This will not imply that all of them are added to the root. The
vote
> should be followed by a deployment plan that may or may not include all of
> them. We should select a number high enough to assure that we have enough
> for any deployment plan for at least one year, maybe two. After that, we
> might want to select again, with the new ideas and conditions that have
> come out in the deployment period.
>
> Each person/entity with voting rights could vote for as many strings as
> gTLDs are going to be selected.
>
> Javier
>