RE: [wg-c] voting on TLDs

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 08:08 AM 3/12/00 -0800, Roeland M. J. Meyer wrote:
>I would say that a proper vetting process is a better answer than simply
>adding them slowly. Reduced rate of new TLD additions is no assurance of

By itself, reduced rate does not guarantee the outcome.  You are quite right.

What reduced rate does afford is the time to consider, review and modify 
structures and processes intended to guarantee the outcome.

For example, simply deciding that a proper vetting process is the key is 
not enough.  It must be specified and consensus on the design must be 
developed.  Design of a such a process is far from straightforward and the 
first version will not be sufficiently correct.  Only through incremental 
review and modification can it be refined.

If there is a flood of new TLDs, then there will be no time or basis for 
changing the process, since too many new TLDs will have been brought in 
under the early and unrefined version of the process.

Hence, staged introduction of new TLDs permits a learning curve on the 
vetting process.

d/

=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker  <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg Consulting  <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253,  Fax: +1.408.273.6464
675 Spruce Drive,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA