ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

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

Re: [ga] DOT BERLIN -- It's a problem...

  • To: kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [ga] DOT BERLIN -- It's a problem...
  • From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:21:15 -0800 (PST)
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=4i+jGZZGIEb694jMPb9eRxSvPvataJJNbDrpRuDtJAbmZSSfzV2HGFTNXQ4Y8X57vAM4Xk2fID1YcuGJHhOFnHExOPv7pM2GDzRrgpwYhwTd48VS8BFj5szah1TIdEcoxqkj5p5i3qQ/R1cNC4Lm4lubJx0H8uLXYyl+wUuh2D8= ;
  • In-reply-to: <000f01c60812$add09780$0201a8c0@kidsearch4>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Re:  "So, then Paris, TX could get the .paris domain."

Yes, they could unless certain allocation decisions
were made in advance.  It we acted on the basis of
First Come First Serve and Paris TX got their
application in first, then they would be awarded the
TLD.  On the other hand, an allocation decision might
be based on the relative size of the sponsoring
community if more than one application for the same
string were to be received, or it might be based on
the results of an open auction or on the basis of a
lottery drawing.  

My point is, that these things cannot be decided on an
ad-hoc basis.  We need predictability.  We need
allocation methodologies that are well understood and
that are accepted on a consensus basis prior to
launching another TLD round, otherwise ICANN will once
again face charges of arbitrary, subjective and
caprious decision-making.




	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. 
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>