Re: [Ietf] New .mobi, .xxx, ... TLDs?

--On Wednesday, 21 April, 2004 15:46 +0100 Tim Chown 
<tjc(_at_)ecs(_dot_)soton(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is the IETF or ISOC going to take any stance against this
> slippery slope?
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/03/20/new.domains.ap/
>
> Comment period closes April 30th.
Tim,

Addressing the IETF part of your question only, let me turn the 
question around.  On what basis would you see the IETF 
objecting?  Certainly the general notion of what ICANN now calls 
a "sponsored" (restricted-use) non-country TLD is nothing new: 
in theory (and in practice for a significant number of years), 
NET, EDU, and others were domains in which one had to meet 
specific requirements to register.  So, if there is a slippery 
slope there, we were down it before RFC 1591 was written.
Clearly, there is a case to be made that at least some of these 
proposals are problematic in one way or another and that some of 
the issues are technical or operational.  But those issues are 
presumably different for different proposals.  So what would you 
have the IETF say, and how would you propose organizing a 
process to approve such a statement, ideally between now and 
April 30?
As a specific example, RFC 3675 addresses some of the issues 
with at least one of these proposals.  But it largely addresses 
policy issues, rather than technical ones, and is an 
individual-submission informational RFC.  Would you propose that 
the IETF endorse it and recommend to ICANN that they pay 
attention to it and, if so, on what basis?
Note that these are just questions to think about -- I've got 
opinions on some of these issues, but hope that you cannot 
deduce them from this particular note.
 regards,
   john


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf