[wg-review] 12 [STLD] special top level domains, report requested by Members of hte WG-review

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dear Chair,
here are some of the topics collected from different sources concerning the 
DNSO/STLD. They will be soon presented on http://stld.og before getting a 
sub-dnso site at http:/stld.dnso.org, as one of the seconded DNSO center of 
interest.

 From different posts on the wg-review ML I understand that some would only 
to see debated the existence of constituencies and the GA. If
you support that approach, I would request you to help us establishing a 
"wg-review-stld" mailing list.

Jefsey

List of questions:

- the ICANN has adopted a new procedure in order to evaluate and accept 
TLDs. This procedure rises many questions (legality, legitimacy, terms and 
conditions, industrial property, duration of the propositions) which have 
never been discussed not voted. This should have been discussed within the DNSO

- ICANN Board has clearly stated at the GAC public meeting in MDR that the 
DNS system could accept one million of TLDs. Will the above procedure apply 
to them all with 50 billions of US$ as an expected return for the ICANN or 
will they become more common. This is of the utmost importance for the 
STLDs: this should be discussed within the DNSO/STLD and any rate decrease 
policy be approved in common.

- What is going to be the future attitude of the ICANN regarding the root, 
its management, the stability of the root service, the dissemination of the 
root servers?  Would the sTLD and the ISP be directly associated?

- one of Jon Postel position was "no conflict" in the TLD area. The WIPO 
and the GAC have declare TLD space as public. specialized TLDs and 
prospective sTLDs  should be given a space to dialog with non ICANN 
approved TLDs.

- several ccTLDs compete with sTLDs. Would here not be a dialog area for 
them within the DNSO?

- most of the propositions have adopted the existing UDRP. This procedure 
has not been defined in cooperation with any specialized TLD and does not 
take into account the specificities of charter and do not define a domain 
name as such and as part of the name space of a specialized TLD. This 
should have been discussed and acted upon in the DNSO/STLD group.

- there should be test bed period for any new TLD before any decision of 
the ICANN. The terms and conditions of such a test bed period and the 
rights of the registrants should be agreed within the DNSO/STLD and 
approved by the BoD to permit a fair and protected try.

- in spite of the FCC and ICANN warnings several registrars pre-register 
Domain Names in violation of the sTLDs sunrise plans. Actions should be 
studied at DNSO/STLD the ICANN could undertake in such cases.

- novelties introduce new concepts in terms of usage of the DNS, hence of 
the definition of domain names and TLDs. This kind of topics should be 
discussed withe gTLDs and ccTLDs.

- specialized TLDs may require not to disclose or to disclose more 
information about  their registrants. Special WhoIs should be develop and 
or new additions should be brought to the WhoIs.

- Definition of the sTLDs and TLDs community Best Practice.

- application of TLDs in local language?

- definition of he nature and of the obligations/protection of the local or 
private TLDs/

- organization of a procedure of appeal against the  TLDs

- creation of a site of all TLDs (ICANN and not ICANN proposed) to common 
advantage.

- contract of registration of the domain names.

- joint position concerting the TM, freespeach, copyrights, novation, etc.. 
and the DNS.

- various types of TLDs management programs (existing, joint specification, 
development sharing)

- multilingual domain names

- direct negotiation vs. published contribution to the ICANN.