RE: [nc-org] Comments on the RFP for Dot Org
Thank you for kick starting this.
I support your idea of a short call with Louis on either 29/4 or 30/4 and am
available to join at either UTC=13 or UTC=20
I await the response of others and finalisation of the date/tie of the call
From: Elisabeth Porteneuve [mailto:Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr]
Sent: Saturday, 27 April, 2002 11:57 a.m.
Subject: [nc-org] Comments on the RFP for Dot Org
Greetings to all,
Sorry for making your life even more overloaded,
you will find below our ToR and few items as I see it
-- your comments, corrections, modifications and idea
are very welcome.
A. The terms of reference of this reactivated NC Dot Org TF
has been set at the NC of 24 April 2002
Decision 2: reactivate dot ORG task Force for the single
task of providing comments to the NC on the Dot Org RFP.
This action follows the ICANN Board's request to the NC
to comment on Request for Proposal (RFP) materials for Dot ORG.
1 May 2002 - Posting of draft Request for Proposal (RFP)
materials for Names Council comment and for applicants
to begin working on their proposals
13 May 2002 - DNSO Names Council to provide ICANN Secretary
any comment on the posted materials
The timeline for our TF has been set by the NC Chair in
explicitely on 8th May, which is
"at least 5 calendar days prior to the May 13 deadline"
B. The reading of documents provided by ICANN staff for the new gTLD
in 2000 may be of help:
New TLD Program Application Process Archive
Criteria for Assessing TLD Proposals:
Not everything is pertinent to Dot Org case, but I recomment
(1), (8) and (9):
1. The need to maintain the Internet's stability.
8. Appropriate protections of rights of others in
connection with the operation of the TLD.
9. The completeness of the proposals submitted and the
extent to which they demonstrate realistic business,
financial, technical, and operational plans and
sound analysis of market needs.
C. In order to provide comment on the RFP for the new Dot Org Registry
we need to focus on understanding of operational elements.
The main difference between Dot Org successor and new gTLD
registry is that the first one must be up and running
to take over 3 million domain names in a very short time,
but will not have to face any headache for sunrise.
I would suggest to gather some facts and information
(when possible) about:
Current Dot Org Registry size:
- number of domain names, distribution of expiration data
per year (how many expires and when, by month)
- number of domain names, distribution per country of Registrant
The staff necessary to operate an open Registry of the
size of 3 million of domain names. It includes to estimate
how many engineers, accountants, and other categories
of staff are required to carry out operation of that organization.
Requirements for operations and distribution of name servers.
Requirements for operations of whois service.
D. No doubts that the nc-org archives will be usefull,
as well as the assotiated comments,
E. Eventually I would suggest we convene NOW, before 1st May,
a short teleconference with Louis Touton to discuss the RFP
issue and have better understanding of the prepared RFP.
I may provide the bridge.
There are two questions:
do you think it is a good idea ?
are you awailable ?
If yes, the only one possible date would be Monday 29
or Tuesday 30 April ?
At usual time of the NC calls (13:00 UTC) ? or at 20:00 UTC ?
California, USA UTC-8+1DST 5:00 12:00
Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+1DST 8:00 15:00
Florida, USA (EST) UTC-5+1DST 8:00 15:00
Amsterdam, Netherland (CET) UTC+1+1DST 14:00 21:00
Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 14:00 21:00
Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+1DST 14:00 21:00
Auckland, New Zealand UTC+12+0DST 24:00 7:00 next day
Dot Org TF Facilitator to start the work immediately