ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


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

Re: [ga] New gTLDs

  • To: Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] New gTLDs
  • From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 08:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: ga <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=lRqm0eU7xndk2f23bXaGZI1Uc2fUs5uSASO1EfP47e8FwzaPS4g1GZEZI17XggU5/QHuuH6NxnrTN4Z5Re32AirIgjzRgrRnD8dE0b01px38oIYDvPdH+fNSsmofeBO8i5H13nmE8X0xPdvsf88vC1GCu+3H32lvEcUKQ+bj93Y=;
  • In-reply-to: <46487490.9090301@publicroot.org>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dr. Joe,
   
  Regarding the gTLDs I believe it is somewhat akin to the Kings New Clothes. Everyone but ICANN can see all the alternatives. I think Karl hits on this extremely well.
  So my thought was that we could remove the curtain from OZ and get ICANN to get involved in the reality rather than their own sandbox.
   
  Eric

Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Hugh Dierker wrote:

> We should begin to develop some positions regarding the new gTLDs.
> 
> Just in general I am for letting them all come in and letting the 
> market dictate success or failure. Of course there need be a few more 
> safegaurds than pure caveat emptor.

Oh - on that note the market has spoken. www.inaic.com and 
www.unifiedroot.com - mind you the market has been represented by crooks 
- but many leading corporations - and at least some people subscribed 
here have supported the inended approach of the market had it remained 
honest. The caveat emptor here is the simple question will icann listen?

ICANN must share the namespace. Too many root fragmentations as a 
result of icann. Market numbers are 100000 TLDs china root, IDNs root, 
arab root, newroot etc etc etc. and of course the internet showboat 
that has resulted as an explosion of namespace.

I would like to see a tld process that does not result in collissions. 
That is a technical necessity to make the internet work. ICANN has to 
ensure their TLDs do not collide with ours in the inclusive name space. 
And like wisethe same is true for us.

I'll get back to you on the INS WG. Thats a TLDA question. They are 
the founders of the inclusive name space replacement for ICANN. What we 
lack are policies and safeguards against corruption, and simple 
allocation policies. And we need community input. That could be the WG?

cheers
joe baptista

> 
> Eric
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Got a little couch potato?
> Check out fun summer activities for kids. 
> 




-- 
Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive,
Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Office: +1 (202) 517-1593
Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

begin:vcard
fn:Joe Baptista
n:Baptista;Joe
org:PublicRoot Consortium
adr:;;963 Ford Street;Peterborough;Ontario;K9J 5V5 ;Canada
email;internet:baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
title:PublicRoot Representative
tel;fax:+1 (509) 479-0084 
tel;cell:+1 (416) 912-6551
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.publicroot.org
version:2.1
end:vcard



  
---------------------------------
Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
 Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.  


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