RE: [wg-c] CONSENSUS CALLS -- THIS IS IT

["Paul Stahura" <stahura@enom.com>]

hope it is not too late to submit my vote...

> 
> PROPOSED ROUGH CONSENSUS ITEM NUMBER ONE	
> 
> 	The initial rollout should include a range of top level 
> domains, from open
> TLDs to restricted TLDs with more limited scope.

Yes

> 
> 
> PROPOSED ROUGH CONSENSUS ITEM NUMBER TWO
> 
> 	Criteria for assessing a gTLD application, subject to 
> current technical
> constraints and evolving technical opportunities, should be 
> based on all of
> the following principles :
> 
> 1. Meaning: An application for a TLD should explain the 
> significance of the
> proposed TLD string, and how the applicant contemplates that 
> the new TLD
> will be perceived by the relevant population of net users.  
> The application
> may contemplate that the proposed TLD string will have its 
> primary semantic
> meaning in a language other than English.
> 
> 2. Enforcement: An application for a TLD should explain the 
> mechanism for
> charter enforcement where relevant and desired.
> 
> 3. Differentiation: The selection of a TLD string should not 
> confuse net
> users, and so TLDs should be clearly differentiated by the 
> string and/or by
> the marketing and functionality associated with the string.
> 
> 4. Diversity: New TLDs are important to meet the needs of an expanding
> Internet community.  They should serve both commercial and 
> non-commercial
> goals.
> 
> 5. Honesty: A TLD should not unnecessarily increase opportunities for
> malicious or criminal elements who wish to defraud net users.
> 
> 6. Competition: The authorization process for new TLDs should 
> not be used
> as a means of protecting existing service providers from competition.

Yes

> 
> PROPOSED ROUGH CONSENSUS ITEM NUMBER THREE
> 
> 	WG-C recommends that the Names Council charter a 
> working group to develop
> policy regarding internationalized domain names using 
> non-ASCII characters.



Yes

Regards,
Paul Stahura

>