[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-c] INT domain
I think we can put this one to bed; Tony has agreed that further dialog on .INT isn't appropriate in wg-c, b/c this working group is intended for discussion of *new* gTLDs. That said, I'm a little surprised that anybody is reviving the argument that chartered TLDs, in general, are somehow out of the scope of WG-C, or that the term "gTLD" in the context of our activities does not include chartered TLDs. Kent suggested this about six weeks ago. Here's my response to him:
> This is quite silly. Here's WG-C's first task as defined in its charter,
>which is on <http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990625.NCwgc.html>:
>
>Should there be new generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs)? If yes: How many?
>Which? At which speed should they be deployed and in which order? What
>should be the mechanism for developing new gTLDs after all these are
>deployed. *Should each new gTLD have a specific charter?*
>
> I'll quote it again: this WG was explicitly tasked to decide whether "each
>new gTLD [should] have a specific charter." For better or for worse,
>that's the job we were given. There's no room for an argument that the
>word "gTLD" in *our* 1999 charter somehow does not include a "gTLD [with] a
>specific charter."
and here's his response to me:
>>>>
You're right -- in my haste looking over the charter I just didn't see
that line, so my argument in that area is garbage.
<<<<
Jon
Jonathan Weinberg
weinberg@msen.com
At 09:20 AM 3/15/00 -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
>At 07:15 AM 3/15/00 -0500, A.M. Rutkowski wrote:
>>The purpose and scope of the INT domain properly
>>falls within the purview of this working group, and
>>the DNSO in general.
>
>This is clearly out of WG-C's scope: .INT is a highly constrained -- that
>is, chartered -- TLD. It therefore is not even close to being a gTLD, and
>gTLDs are the current scope of this working group.
>
>So, rather than introduce new and wonderfully contentious and certainly
>distracting material, how about looking for ways to keep the working group
>focused, rather than de-focused?
>
>d/
>
>=-=-=-=-=
>Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
>Brandenburg Consulting <www.brandenburg.com>
>Tel: +1.408.246.8253, Fax: +1.408.273.6464
>675 Spruce Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA
>
>
>