Re: [wg-c] .eu and the notion of regional TLDs

[Harold Feld <hfeld@mediaaccess.org>]

This was my point fro my earlier post (which appears to have attracted no
interest).

The process of adding new regional TLDs needs a *process*, not an ad hoc
invention.  The DNSO is the logic place to begin developing such a process.
(If it isn't, what is?  ICANN staff?  A new working group?  Something else?)

If .EU and .pa (or whatever the Palestinian Authority asked for) were
isolated cases, an ad hoc decision by the Board might be appropriate.
But, as Jay Parker's message suggests, we are likely to see numerous
applications from regional entities.  (Many regional multinational
entities that are the product of an international treaty exist, some
with overlapping members.)  In addition, a number of quasi-states, semi-
sovereign organizations, etc. exist, and I predict they will seek TLDs.

Contrary to Dave Crocker, I do not believe there is a "ccTLD process" that
handles
this.  The bulk of the ccTLD delegations took place well before the formation
of ICANN, and ICANN's relationship with the ccTLDs is still vague.

I will now once agian make my usual plea for this working group, the DNSO,
and ICANN to view this as an opportunity to create a process, rather than
focusing on the merits of the particular application.  I would be extremely
happy if:

1) There were an articularted process to handle applications for new TLDs that
do not conveniently fall into the "gTLD/ccTLD" classification.

2) This working group and the DNSO, which are constituted to deal with naming
issues,
were involved in formulating process.

Please note I am *not* suggesting that this working group or the DNSO should
pass
on the merits of the applications.  Frankly, I do not believe that should be our
role.
I do believe, however, that the DNSO, its relevant constituencies, and the
relevant working
groups should be involved in shaping the process.

Done right, this presents an opportunity for meaningfull input, a demonstration
that ICANN can function to generate policy in a new area, and creates buy-in
from participants in the process.  Done wrong, it will disolve into the usual
combative fray and ill-feeling.

Harold

Jay Parker wrote:

> The .eu debate is complicated, that much is clear. However, there are areas
> of the globe, such as the Caribbean Basin, which could benefit tremendously
> from the kind of community a regional TLD could foster. Unlike the EU, which
> has member states enjoying robust country code business and relatively
> healthy economies, the Caribbean is making slow progess (or no progress) in
> that arena, and could utilize a regional designation to create social and
> economic opportunities as a collective. There's really no debating the idea
> that, in general, the region could use all the economic opportunity it can
> get.
>
> Here's my point: I would hope the notion of a regional TLD, like .eu, would
> not be dismissed completely, even if that particular TLD is deemed to be
> unneccesary.
>
> Jay Parker
> West Indies Communications Group
> International Trust House
> 180 East Bay Street
> Charleston, South Carolina 29401
> USA
> tel: +843-805-8460
> fax: +843-805-8466
> www.westcomgroup.com