Re: [wg-c] Straw Vote

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 04:52:55PM -0400, Jonathan Weinberg wrote:

As a general point, I don't believe that these questions can be 
separated as you have done it. 

> QUESTION ONE: HOW MANY NEW gTLDS, AND HOW FAST?
> 
> Option 1:	Without regard to whether it would be desirable to have many
> gTLDs in the long term, ICANN should proceed now by adding only a few, and
> then pausing for evaluation.  Only after assessing the results should it
> initiate any action to add more.

Option 1

> QUESTION TWO: HOW TO SELECT TLD STRINGS AND REGISTRIES?
> 
> 	Option 1:  ICANN should decide on a set of new gTLD strings, and then
> solicit applications from would-be registries (or existing registries) to
> run those TLDs.  In picking the new gTLD strings, it should use an ad hoc
> approach to choose the new gTLDs that it thinks will best serve the
> Internet community.  Each proponent of a new gTLD would apply to the NC for
> formation of a WG devoted to that gTLD string (or to several strings).  The
> WG would then generate a charter for each proposed new TLD, and it would be
> up to the NC and ICANN to approve the WG's product.  This process would
> likely generate some broad-based TLDs along with some more narrowly focused
> ones (which might have restrictive registration policies).
> 
> 	Option 2: Same as Option One, except that a standing WG would make
> periodic proposals for new gTLDs.

I favor option 1.  From my point of view, option 2 is merely an
implementation detail of option 1. 

> QUESTION THREE: SHOULD REGISTRIES BE FOR-PROFIT OR NON-PROFIT?  HOW MANY
> gTLDS SHOULD THEY RUN?
> 
> Option 1: All registries would be run on a not-for-profit, cost-recovery
> basis.  (The "registry operator," in the sense that Emergent was the
> operator of the planned CORE registry, could be a for-profit company.)
> Registries could operate any number of gTLDs.

Option 1.

> QUESTION FOUR:  SHOULD ICANN REQUIRE SHARING?

> Option 2:  An ICANN rule would presumptively require that gTLDs be shared,
> but ICANN would allow exceptions in particular cases.  (A single registry
> might run both shared and non-shared gTLDs.)

Option 2.  However, I don't believe the various questions are 
independent. 

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain