[wg-c] New TLDs

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

New TLDs are new TLDs. Which root-service they use is irrelevant. It would
be extremely myopic for us to ignore them and procede as if they didn't
exist. I would argue that they do indeed fall under the charter of WG-C, if
for no other reason than that their existance provides instance-proofs of
various points claimed in these discussions. These are valid points that we
should not be ignorant of, lest we appear to be fools.

The discussions have centered around the policies of a root registry. To not
look at the policies of other root-registries, in fact to claim that they
don't exist, is blatant ignorance. Such ignorance should invalidate the
output of this working group. In fact, the output of this WG should feed
into the policies of a root registry, run by ICANN/IANA, as recommended by
my paper (which is the only position paper explicitly stating that the
ICANN/IANA should even run such a registry, BTW).

Jonathan, I would suggest that this WG address this issue; Should ICANN/IANA
run a root-registry? If we can not answer that question, then we can't
reasonably answer the "How many?" question because there would be no
substratum to install the TLDs on. Although we have reasonably answered the
"If any?" issue, the next issue is "where and how?" because that determines
"how many?". If there is no buy-in to a root-registry then the rest becomes
moot, as there is no place to locate new TLDs of any quantity.

------------------------------------------
R O E L A N D  M. J. M E Y E R
"Stupid" has no ability to know, "Ignorant" has no desire to know.
Stupidity deserves sympathy, Ignorance deserves our worst disparagement.