RE: [wg-c] Re: your mail

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

>I believe that this would be rather similar to starting the house with the
>roof. Your position "choose the registries" and then get them to choose
what
>they want to run results in a situation in that what exists is there
because
>those registries have chosen it to be so, in other words, the situation
>would be a product of the will of the registries. The position "choose the
>TLDs" creates a situation where the entities running the registry are just
>filling in an operational need, in other words, it is much less unlikely
for
>us to wind up in a situation favourable to the registries just for the heck
>of it.

Okay, I'll accept your position, though I don't agree completely. As a
middle-ground, then, I'd suggest that they go hand-in-hand. When a registry
steps up and says, "We meet the objective criteria ICANN has set down,"
they also specify the TLD that they intend to run, state any information
that is relevant, and perhaps give a charter for it, should it be
decided that charters are part of the procedure.

But if I say registry then TLD, and you say TLD and then registry, then I
see a compromise in saying both at the same time.

--
Christopher Ambler
chris@the.web