[ncdnhc-discuss] One suggestion for .ORG TF participant!

[James Love]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alejandro Pisanty - DGSCA y FQ, UNAM" <apisan at servidor.unam.mx>
> This is not an amateur operation. Not necessarily to be run by a
> for-profit, existing registry, but indeed by a number of non-commercial
> organizations which
> have been gradually squeezed out of this constituency: universities,
> academic networks, ccTLDs, etc.

   Alejandro, all of these non-commercial organizations are members of and
participate in the NCC.  I would personally remove the ccTLDs, because they
have their own constituency, and they are providers, not consumers.  (this
is a domain holders constituency).

   I also don't think the operation of the registry is an amateur operation.
In my own view, I would be ok with ICANN giving .org to the low bidder (or
high bidder for good works money...), to make the allocation transparent and
fair.   But I was proposing something that was consistent with the bottom up
ICANN approach that the ICANN bylaws require.  The NC report on .org is
there.  If ICANN is basically saying the DNSO is different from the other
SOs, and ICANN can ignore the NC decisions, then maybe it should change the
bylaw and we can stop wasting our time on the NC, except for worrying about
who gets elected to the ICANN board.  (I guess after the NCC loses its
votes, even that won't matter much).

    The idea of a two stage bid is to have the technical operator selected
after the non-profit is selected.  The ICANN staff could play its
traditional role of due diligence on the second stage operator on the
technical an financial issues that it focused on in the new TLD round....
the issues for the non-profit are anything but technical, however.   Putting
the two together is one way to do things, but IMO, not the  best.  However,
the board doesn't seem that sympathetic to the NC proposal, so I am not
optimistic about it making any kind of good faith effort to follow the NC
.org report.   Correct me if this is an unfair assessment.

Jamie

--------------------------------
James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org
http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040