ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

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

Re: [ga] Re: On new TLDs

  • To: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Re: On new TLDs
  • From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 05:58:57 -0800 (PST)
  • Cc: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=EGdz2ebD7MNQzOwhZZamePMO0xi4iG8gphNyxpGH1AdQsXZoMtgFGoHchCUxpS5AT4iWtaUfwgDCX2p6dCG/Oj92GihrR9BuGpdpFI3x74M5Juc3zzsEam7hCYVF0RI4pN8fJP+WUBtXBF24UPLl91iUhKvREFIVA8QyxUuAQ1c= ;
  • In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0512080102360.23781@lear.cavebear.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Karl makes a good point.  He writes:  "Are you, or
ICANN, prepared to demonstrate with clear and
convincing evidence that the effective freeze on new
TLDs is necessary to protect the 
public from specific and identifiable harms?"

I think that we need to differentiate between "policy"
and "strategy".  A freeze on new TLDs, or the details
of the timing of the introduction of new TLDs, is a
strategic issue rather than a policy issue.

The only policy issue that we are being asked to
address in the first point of the GNSO Terms of
Reference is:  "whether there should there be new
TLDs?"  Not when, or what type, but in its simplest
form:  new TLDs -- yes or no?

To answer this question, we should take guidance from
ICANN's stated mission, a part of which states,
"Coordinates the operation and evolution of the DNS
root name server system".

The word "evolution" is not in there by accident. 
Things change.  It's the nature of the world.  When we
consider the evolution of other media we note that
when publishers/printers first got started with
typesetting there were only a couple of books being
produced.  Now there are billions.

When radio first got started there were only a limited
number of active frequencies; today the radio dial is
replete with choices.

In the early days of TV there were only a few
channels; now there are hundreds.

Evolution leads to the proliferation of choice.  

So yes, there should be new TLDs because if ICANN
re-invents its mission and doesn't continue to offer
choices, consumers will route around ICANN to take
advantage of the choices offered elsewhere in the
market.  The recent IDN workshop in Vancouver pointed
to IDN offerings available through either plug-ins or
via the ISP community that have already been selected
by up to 85 million people.  The route-around and
balkanization of the Internet has already started.

As a matter of policy ICANN should offer new TLDs.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>