Re: [ga] Public Comment: Single, Two and Select Three = increased accessability

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Somebody refresh my GA list memory.  We don't want this, Why?
 
Because the increase in general availability will dilute domain names' value 
that are already owned and up for resale?

--- On Thu, 5/7/09, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ga] Public Comment: Single, Two and Select Three Character Names in 
.PRO
To: "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:55 AM

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org]
[To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org]
[To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org]

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-06may09-en.htm
Public Comment: Single, Two and Select Three Character Names in .PRO

6 May 2009

ICANN is today opening a public comment forum on a proposed amendment from
RegistryPro to Appendix C and K of the .PRO Registry Agreement.

On 8 April 2009, ICANN posted for public information a request submitted by
RegistryPro through the Registry Services Evaluation Process (RSEP). The request
calls for a phased allocation process for single, two and select three character
names in .PRO.

The RegistryPro proposal is available at
http://www.icann.org/registries/rsep/registry-pro-08apr09-en.pdf [PDF, 132K].

As provided for by existing consensus policy
(http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/rsep.html), ICANN performed a
preliminary review to determine whether the proposal might raise significant
security, stability, or competition issues. ICANN's determination is that
the proposal does not raise such issues.

[Note that, from 13 June to 13 July 2008, ICANN conducted a public comment
forum on a proposed single-character second-level domain names allocation
framework
(http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/proposed-scsld-allocation-framework-13jun08.htm),
which supported the allocation single-character second-level domain names in
existing registries and reviewed various allocation methods.]

The proposal requires an amendment the .PRO Schedule of Reserved Names
(Appendix K) and a description of the phased allocation program is proposed to
be inserted in Section 12 of Appendix C. A copy of the proposed contract
amendment is available here [PDF, 100K]. Comments on the proposed amendment may
be submitted to pro-alloc-amendment at icann.org through 5 June 2009 23:59 UTC.
Comments may be viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/pro-alloc-amendment/.

All documentation related to the RegistryPro proposal is available at
http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/#2009002.
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://gnso.icann.org