Re: [ga] sTLD Premium Names

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Karl, 

The relatively new Registry Services Evaluation Policy
was the direct result of the technical stability
issues raised in the wake of SiteFinder. 

The policy calls for disclosure on the part of
registries prior to the launch of new services or
changes to the architecture or operation of an
existing TLD... the goal, if I recall correctly, was
to avoid "astonishment".

I'm not arguing in favor or against premium names or
passing any judgment as to whether this is an area
within the scope of ICANN (in fact, premium names are
already a part of the .mobi contract); my primary
concern was that (1) a plan was announced by a
sponsoring organization (that meets the registry
services definition) that apparently still hasn't been
vetted by the RSEP; and (2) that potentially impacted
parties (registrants) have an opportunity to comment
on what may be an upcoming proposal to reserve a
valuable block of names for the primary financial
benefit of a registry operator.

If all registries start reserving valuable blocks of
the namespace for their own aggrandisement, then the
trusteeship of the TLD sponsor is rightfully called
into question.

Finally, the RSEP may determine that this proposal
raises no issues... that's OK... but I found it odd
that the plan would be "announced" by the .travel folk
and yet half a year later it still hasn't been
submitted to the RSEP.  

That raises in my mind concerns as to whether
.travel's new management really knows what they're
doing.






      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/