<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] All future names should be sponsored
- To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [ga] All future names should be sponsored
- From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 05:51:57 -0800 (PST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=hOnwbZk8Z4JCO7r2SWPQUCHzzmMCpN5OUYwCCyR4QvfqjWekcS5n7NP9hV3neZF7zUI7eVZcXZ/rX3tovcAYaUZZ+iPCoTs87M93yi9TNyod9U30G88qs4/aMqX+kJjDbKad8wN2fQDwTveEnBoxCGC/pJObDS/SceG1ffwBrZ0= ;
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
With regard to selection criteria, the Business
Constituency has argued that "all future names should
be sponsored".
"All new names should be sponsored within the ICANN
categorization. New gTLDs should be proposed to ICANN
by the registry/sponsor. So long as an application is
evaluated to fully comply with the principles and the
guidelines, the proposal would be accepted."
http://www.bizconst.org/positions/WPnewgTLDsfinal.doc
Comments?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|