DNSO Mailling lists archives


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

Re: [gtld-com] Request for final comments

Just in case there is any confusion, Thomas's 
comment expressed "support" for Chun's request
to remove items 7 and 8, and added a request to
take out #6 as well.

I support both Thomas's and Chun's suggestions.

>>> "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be> 05/28/03 05:06AM >>>
thanks for the support and comment.

As you know, adding value was one of the criteria in the Lynn report which was supported in the registrars position paper.
You are right to point out the intrinsic difference between the objective of adding value and the need for ICANN to make  a judgment about this. I believe this is why Bruce earlier made the suggestion which I will act upon in separating out the objectives in expanding the name space from the criteria that may apply to any applicant registry.

>>>Thomas Keller>>>

I want to voice my support for all of the points mentioned below
and suggest that paragraph 6 of the possible criteria which
referes to adding value to the dns should be taken out as well.
Out of my view it is very hard to define what really is adding
value and it contraticts our statement that the introduction
of new TLD should be bottom up and demand driven. If it is demand 
driven there is no need for a judgement of value because at the
end of the day the market will decide whether it is of value
or not and the business model connected to it will succeed or

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