RE: [wg-c] INT domain

[Jean-Michel Becar <Jean-Michel.Becar@etsi.fr>]

The GA of DNSO will be appropriate place to discuss this issue.
The WG-C is dealing only with the introduction of new TLDs and it could
valuable to give inputs to the GA.

My 0.000002 cts

Jean-Michel Becar

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin J. Connolly [mailto:CONNOLLK@rspab.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 2:06 PM
To: wg-c@dnso.org; amr@netmagic.com
Subject: Re: [wg-c] INT domain


 "A.M. Rutkowski" <amr@netmagic.com> wrote (03/15/00 07:15AM)
>Jon,
>
>The purpose and scope of the INT domain properly
>falls within the purview of this working group, 

The Charter for WG-C states:

Working Group C (WG C) is requested to develop a document -showing 
the consensus of the different groups involved- responding to the following
questions:

            1.Should there be ***new*** generic Top Level Domains 
               (gTLDs)? If yes: How many? Which? At which speed 
               should they be deployed and in which order? What 
               should be the mechanism for developing ***new*** 
               gTLDs after all these are deployed. Should each 
               ***new*** TLD have a specific charter? 

            2.What should the registration and data maintenance 
               process and regulation be?.

            3.How should the ***new*** gTLDs be managed? 
               What should the registry(ies) be like? Is it
               mandatory to have a ***new*** registry(ies)?  . . . 

[emphasis supplied]

.INT is an existing, not a new, TLD.  Unless and until this 
WG's charter is expanded to cover existing TLDs, the post 
responded-to is completely outside the bailiwick of this WG.  
Substantive attention to the post is inconsistent with the 
orderly accomplishment of the charter that was set for this 
Working Group in June 1999.


>and
>the DNSO in general.

I would not presume to set limits on or discuss the role of the 
DNSO.  I observe only that this WG has a limited charter and 
was intended to have a limited life.

Kevin J. Connolly
The opinions expressed are those of the author, not of Robinson 
Silverman Pearce Aronsohn & Berman LLP
This note is not legal advice.  If it were, it would come with an invoice.
As usual, please disregard the trailer which follows.

**********************************************************************
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
and is or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work
product doctrine, joint defense privileges, trade secret protections,
and/or other applicable protections from disclosure.  If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this com-
munication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communi-
cation in error, please immediately notify us by calling our Help Desk
at 212-541-2000 ext.3314, or by e-mail to helpdesk@rspab.com
**********************************************************************