[ncdnhc-discuss] What about 5 (or more) ICANNs?

[Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law]

You want to avoid collisions and appearance of partiality.

You could make rules that said (e.g.) group one gets
four-letter-names-starting-with-D and so on, but why not give everyone
maximal freedom?  Say rathr, group one gets five names not yet taken of
its choice, and here's the master list...

On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, James Love wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin at law.miami.edu>
> > I think we should distinguish between the tasks that require
> > centralization (e.g. unique list of names) and those that don't.  Those
> > that don't should be more radically decentralized than just regionally.
> > Cf. http://personal.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/senate-feb14-2001.htm
> >
> 
>    I think you could decentralize the issues surrounding the unique list of
> names, as well.  You could agree that different regional bodies would
> allocate names, and negotiate between groups where issues of uniqueness
> present a problem.  Or is there some reason why this won't work?
> 
> 

-- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin at law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                        -->It's warm here.<--