[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-c] Choosing the intial testbed
Dave Crocker wrote:
> The basic idea of having a broad effort is quite reasonable. The problem
> with your particular choices are that, as noted, there won't be an
> operational at-large mechanism for something. The other problem is that
> there has not been a particularly active, and certainly not coherent, and
> most especially not representative, non-commercial domain holder's
If someone wants the "perfect" solution, then they should invent
something else, because I would agree that mine has flaws.
I think if you identified the groups that would decide, they would
end up with decisions. If the registrars and business constituency had
to agree on 3 TLDs, they would probably come up with 3 they could live
with. Even with lots of blood on the floor.
If the non-commerical domain holders could choose 3, they would
become pretty active, and at the end of the day, 3 names would emerge.
Probably with some blood on the floor too, but what is the alternative
-- to give the decision to the ICANN board?
For the voting proposal. ICANN does have a membership system. It is
in place. If there was a "ballot" on 3 TLDS, it would give people a
reason to register as a member. It's open and free right now. It may
have flaws, but compared to what?
The ballot proposal could include proposals, that included
management systems. If there were more than one management proposal,
you could add the votes to make the "cut" and then have a run off on the
different proposals. Or you could just take the top 3 votes, including
the proposed management structure.
> Having already participated in an effort to produce a list of 7 names, I'm
> disinclined to do it again, myself.
> >some other way. Perhaps a lottery by those with "pioneer" proposals, or
> You would consider giving the rogue registry participants -- the folks who
> tried to replace the IANA DNS root system -- special position???
I've never taken a position on the "pioneer" or "rogue" registry
proposals. I don't know enough about this to make an informed decision
one way or the other. I'm not sure I want to.
I was just pointing out that the three methods I suggested need not be
James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org
Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030
Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 220.127.116.1176