[wg-c] The scope of gTLDs

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 03:34 PM 3/15/00 -0500, Jonathan Weinberg wrote:
>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:

The problem is that chartering a TLD -- that is, defining its use so as to 
exclude potential registrants -- is exactly contrary to existing gTLD 
practise.

.MIL is not a gTLD.  Neither is .INT.  They are chartered.  They are 
fundamentally different than com/net/org.

It's fine for the working group charter to raise the question, since 
resolution of the question has not been documented.

It is NOT fine for the working group or ICANN to confuse two, entirely 
different administrative schemas.

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