[wg-c] Excerpt from [ga] IANA-ccTLD managers meeting, Monday Nov. 1

[Eric Brunner <brunner@world.std.com>]

The URL (Anthony Antony Van Couvering's notes) excerpted from is:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc01/msg00074.html

JE - Next agenda item.  New TLDs.  New ccTLDs authorized but not yet
delegated, .PS for instance.  There are two undelegated ccTLDs, Western
Sahara (.EH) and North Korea (.KP).  Introduce Jonathan Weinberg of Working
Group C which is studying new gTLDs.

Jonathan Weinberg - Co-chair of WG-C.  DNSO generates recommendations for
ICANN.  Working group has an open membership, and has participants from
widely varying viewpoints.  Great deal of vigorous discussion on these
questions.  The news is that within the past few days the WG generated an
interim report, which can be found on the DNSO website
(http://www.dnso.org).  Soon there will be a request for comments.  The
actual conclusions listed in the interim report are not extensive. Basically
there are two policy items which we believe have consensus, and a slew of
position papers by different groups.  Please read and tell us what you
think.   The 2 items of agreement are:  (1) There should be new gTLDs (2)
ICANN to introduce 6 - 10 new gTLDs then a review period to see if there
were problems - and, if there was no problem, they would go ahead with more
gTLDs.  As far as other issues are concerned, there is no consensus yet.

Budi - What are the new domain names?

JW - There are none decided yet, and it is also not decided who will decide
what they are.  There are various proposals on the floor.  ICANN decides, a
standing working group to decide, the registries themselves would decide -
these are all proposals.  One exception is .NAA, for "North American
Aboriginals", specialized domain.

Dennis Jennings - Haven't read the document.  I'm neutral about new gTLDs.
Does the document answer the questions: Why new gTLDs, and what benefit
accrues to the Internet community.

JW - Document divided into two parts.  Part One describes the consensus of
the WG - 2.5 pages long, then 30 pages of the position papers.  The
consensus doesn't give reasons, although the position papers do.  Almost all
of the proposals give a reason for why.  At such time as there is a final
report, the language of that paper would answer those questions.

Naomasa - You mentioned the creation of .NA...

JW - No, it's .NAA.  Just a proposal, one of several position papers, not
official.

Naomasa - If it's North America, there could be other regions, who decides.

JW - The various position papers contemplate different approaches for who
would choose new gTLDs.  The author of the .NAA proposal contemplates that
ICANN would select the strings, and that they start with .NAA.

Jim Higgins - Why does .NAA have to be a generic TLD.  Why isn't .NAA under
.US?

JW - The position paper process as follows: The co-chairs issued a request
to members of the working group to come up with position papers to reflect
their views.  Seven appeared.  Some proposals had more signatures than
others.  The fact that it's included in the interim report doesn't imply any
official status.

Patrick O'Brien - There are 6 million sheep in New Zealand - shouldn't they
have their own gTLD.  What is the process.

MA - The process is that the DNSO is supposed to find a consensus, ratified
by the NC, sent out for public review by ICANN Board, then sent to other
SOs, then Board takes a vote.  There's a long row to hoe.

JW - The most we have is a consensus of a working group on a very few
points.  Hopefully there will be enough consensus to bring forward a
coherent set of recommendations to the DNSO.  Would like to reinforce the
idea that the WG-C has a limited ability - we are self-selected.  Hopefully
we'll come up with something that are good ideas, and that they will
represent a consensus.

Craig Simon - WG-C clarification.  Dennis Jenning's question about why.
Speculation has driven prices, new gTLDs will bring price down.

Dennis Jennings - It would be useful if the work were structured in such a
way that people who like myself consider their time valuable can read over
the work quickly.  .NAA brings to mind a new ccTLD called .EU.

Elisabeth Porteneuve - My understanding was that there is a big pressure to
have new gTLDs because .US doesn't work.  Some brand names cannot be
enforced on an international level.  What's happening with .US.

Zita Wenzel - Currently undergoing discussions for changes in .US.  Just
beginning discussions.

End of excerpt.

 The answer to the question offered by Jim Higgens (ISOCNZ) is that
 indians live in Canada also, not just the US. If NSN.US worked, we'd
 not be spending time on the issue. As he and I've discussed the issue
 (I occasionally advise the Ministry for Maori Development on the
 IWI.NZ set of issues), perhaps he's just forgotten the answer, or
 misspoke.

 The likening of indigenous peoples to 6 million sheep (or 60), not
 deserving of a gTLD is slightly humorous. Patrick O'Brien is also a
 ISOCNZ participant in this NC meeting.

Well, that is some of the status for the week for WG-C.

Cheers,
Eric