nanog mailing list archives
Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs
From: Joly MacFie <joly () punkcast com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:17:04 -0400
Another avenue could be At-Large. The North American Regional At-Large Organization (NARALO) - uniquely amongst the RALO's - accepts individual members. http://naralo.org j On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 10:26 PM, David Conrad <drc () virtualized org> wrote:
Well, yes, ICANN could have contracted parties (e.g., the new gTLDs) do this. A bit late to get it into the Applicant's Guidebook, but maybe something could be slipped in after the fact. Who is going to lead the contingent from NANOG to raise this in the GNSO? Of course, changing existing contracts tends to be challenging since the contracted parties have to agree to the changes and I wouldn't be surprised if they demanded ICANN give something up in exchange for agreeing to this new restriction. It'll probably take a while. ICANN can respectfully request ccTLD folks do the same, but whether or not the ccTLDs listen is a separate matter. If the ccTLD folks feel they gain benefit from having naked TLDs, they'll tell ICANN to take a hike. Not sure what will happen with the IDN ccTLDs since they appear to be sort of a combination of ccTLDs and contracted parties. You probably know all this, but things in the ICANN world probably don't work the way most folks think. Regards, -drc
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -
Current thread:
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs, (continued)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Robert Bonomi (Jun 20)
- RE: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs George Bonser (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John R. Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Owen DeLong (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Matthew Palmer (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Joly MacFie (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Jay Ashworth (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John R. Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Tony Finch (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Jay Ashworth (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Adam Atkinson (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Adam Atkinson (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)