[FYI] ICANN to establish criteria for future gTLDs

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

----- Forwarded message from Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org> -----

From: Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 01:33:37 +0100
Subject: Please forward: ICANN to establish criteria for future gTLDs
Reply-To: roessler-mobile@does-not-exist.net


ICANN to establish criteria for future gTLDs


ICANN's president and CEO, M. Stuart Lynn, has published an action
plan regarding new gTLDs, available from ICANN's web site.

<http://www.icann.org/committees/ntepptf/new-gtld-action-plan-18oct02.htm>

The plan suggests, subject to the eventual approval by the board,
that ICANN undertakes three steps in parallel:

1. Perform a process to add three more sponsored gTLDs to the DNS
root, provided that (a) the organizations coordinating the new
sponsored registries [added in the 2000 round of new gTLDs] are able
to manage the required technical and business responsibilities, and
that (b) registrations in these sponsored gTLDs indeed match the
established registration criteria.  The president's report suggests
that these two questions can be answered in relatively short time,
and that the answer will be consistent with adding more sponsored
gTLDs.

2. Evaluate and monitor the effects of the gTLDs added to the DNS
root in 2000.  This evaluation is suggested to be the task of a TLD
evaluation advisory committee.

3. Start work on the framework for future introductions of new
gTLDs.  Developing this framework and process is part of ICANN's
assignments under its amended Memorandum of Understanding with the
U.S. Department of Commerce. This is nothing less than the framework
under which ICANN will perform one of its most crucial "steady
state" functions, the addition of new gTLDS.

The specific question raised in the president's report is whether
the addition of new TLD strings should happen in a purely
market-driven manner, or whether ICANN should administer a process
to a priori design a "rational and comprehensive set of available
TLD strings", which would then be made available to registries in a
bidding process.  The president's report suggests that this question
should be referred to the DNSO/GNSO for consideration and advice.
The Names Council currently does not expect to initiate a formal
policy-development process on this question.  Rather, it is
anticipated that an eventual referral of this question by the board
will be handled by the Council itself, on the basis of input from
the various constituencies.

ICANN's answer to this question will have a great impact on the
future development on the DNS name space.


For this reason, I urge you to analyze the president's report, and
to submit comments to ICANN both on the proposed process, and in
particular on the basic framework you suggest for future, "steady
state" additions of new gTLDs.  If thinking on this framework is
available in a timely manner, it will also be much easier to
communicate to the Names Council those perspectives and positions
which may not be represented by the existing DNSO/GNSO
constituencies.


Comments should be submitted to <gtld-plan-comments@icann.org>, and
should ideally be made before 10 December 2002.  Comments received
by ICANN are archvied at <http://forum.icann.org/>.

Please forward this message as appropriate.

-- 
Thomas Roessler	(mobile)	<roessler-mobile@does-not-exist.net>

----- End forwarded message -----


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@lists.fitug.de