ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Most Popular Invalid TLDs Should Be Reserved

  • To: GNSO GA Mailing List <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Most Popular Invalid TLDs Should Be Reserved
  • From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 06:50:52 -0800 (PST)

Hi folks,

I noticed that ICANN's SSAC finally published a study on the invalid TLD 
at the top level, following on my post from June 2009 on the GA list, and on 


I find it odd, though, that my name and work went unacknowledged in ICANN's 
report, even though it was the impetus of the work, they were aware of it, and 
it pre-dated their work. I trust that they will correct this oversight (or 
at some point. They were quick to add their own names to it, though, even as 
their contributions were smaller than my own.


George Kirikos

----- Original Message ----
From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
To: GNSO GA Mailing List <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: dave.piscitello@xxxxxxxxx; steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ram Mohan 
Sent: Sun, August 2, 2009 7:29:06 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] Most Popular Invalid TLDs Should Be Reserved


--- On Fri, 6/19/09, Ram Mohan <rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> George,
> I write as SSAC's Liaison to the Board.  I will take
> your suggestion forward
> regarding a study on invalid TLDs into the SSAC's planning
> session at the
> Sydney meeting.

I wanted to followup on the past discussion from:


Did the SSAC decide to study invalid TLDs? I didn't find anything posted on the 
SSAC website or in the Sydney transcripts (although not every meeting had 
transcripts), and it's been some time since Sydney.


George Kirikos

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>