Re: [council] FW: the topic of new gTLDs and the role of gNSO Council

[Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 27/07/2005 2:21 PM avri doria noted that;

> In any case, it looks like the GNSO, ccNSO, and advsories have certain
> responsibilities between them in this process:
> 
> - create and implement procedures for designation of TLD Registries
> - public explanation of the process
> - selection criteria
> - rationale for selection decisions.
> 
> Is this what we are, or should be, in the midst of doing?

I believe that this is what we *should* be in the midst of doing so that
we can move on to closing off what you recommend in your next question...

> 
> Since the recommendations for the initial test run of TLD assignments
> has pretty much run its course, except perhaps for the final evaluation
> of success, are we at a point where we should be making policy
> recommendations for a fair, transparent and predictable ongoing process?

I believe that this is what some are suggesting taking on as a workload.
I don't have a substantial problem with it as long as we're doing it in
the context of past work, and consistent with the output of that work.
In other words, let's finish off the work of the last five years instead
of re-doing the work of the work of the last five years.

- --
Regards,



                       -rwr








                "Every contrivance of man, every tool, every instrument,
                 every utensil, every article designed for use, of each
                 and every kind, evolved from very simple beginnings."
                        - Robert Collier


Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)

iD8DBQFC596N6sL06XjirooRApkcAJ0RmcD8fDqOIm+nnhZdb97u6pisAACfY7rm
VDlnGO7ElPxEmqQrogLhy2g=
=Pey7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----