[wg-c] Delegation models (was: proprietary TLDs)

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

William,

If you'd like to make the case that only one delegation model makes sense
would you expand on your thinking?

Personally I'm puzzled by a few nits:

1. If ICANN lacks the capacity to make discretionary policy, to what body
   do we look to to find this limit? Where do we find the general rule and
   its author?

2. If discretion is within ICANN's capacity, what characteristics of a new
   gTLD is subject to this discretion?

3. As the fragment of Kent's reply to Milt's odd idea that the US Colored
   Papers ought to be read as directing the successor to the IANA to gift,
   in a private law context, Soverign status to applicants, is what caught
   your attention, just what do you think the issue is? Renewal? If so, of
   what?
   	a) the delegation by ICANN?
	b) the policy model of the delegatee?
	c) the selection of operator(s)?
	d) the selection of registrar(s)?

I don't mind that you hold the view that we can't have Indians. What nits
I have are if you hold the view we can't have any policy but market policy,
and if not, if you hold the view we can't have airports or the EU, except
as fortuitous accidents of some SLD delegation by some policy-competent TLD
delegatee.

Cheers and happy leftovers,
Eric

P.S. In case yesterday's question was unclear on this point, the estimate
for CORE licensing or sale cost should be for a single registry operator,
not a less tractible all-in-one sea of vagueness. TiA!