Re: [wg-c] nsi proposes to create new gTLds

[Eric Brunner <brunner@world.std.com>]

Jon,

Thanks for the pointer. It is sort of a coin toss, which of Michael
Palage's or Roger Cochetti's dramatic urges is the most comic act
of the week -- Sunrise over Bolivian Trade Marks or Two Quaint Acts
of Polite Differentiation. Philip Shepard's coup remains the high
point of Q1.

On the bright side the NC didn't take either of two extremes, invites
RFPs by operator applicants, and in Paul Kane's draft (para missing
in Louis Touton's final), is the reviewing task force Kent proposed.
Not quite as good as pushing Philip, Michael and Roger under the first
passing bus, but on the whole not bad.

Should WG-C be disbanded? I think it should. The factionalism has not
diminished between the B and the A/D/E papers, and the dialog between
the C faction and the non-C factions ended five months ago. We were
close to utility when struggling with cost and policy, but the set of
distractions, external and internal were too great.

As the final draft sent out under Louis Touton's signature solicits
expressions of interest by operator applicants, the NAA Registry group
will make its interest known to the ICANN staff. We will be meeting in
DC next week to prepare our expression of interest.

In the interest of cooperation I invite members of WG-C who have a
similar program, or who consider acting as a registrar for the NAA
gTLD, to contact me via email.

Eric