Group One Registry   ICB   WebVision  
Sponsored TLD Application
Transmittal Form

Organization's Proposal

Operator's Proposal

Description of
TLD Policies

Requested Confidential
Treatment of
Materials Submitted

Sponsoring Organization's
Fitness Disclosure

Registry Operator's
Fitness Disclosure

Support Letters


ICANN Registry Proposal

Description of TLD Policies



E28. Recent experience in the introduction of new TLDs is limited in some respects. The current program of establishing new TLDs is intended to allow evaluation of possible additions and enhancements to the DNS and possible methods of implementing them. Stated differently, the current program is intended to serve as a "proof of concept" for ways in which the DNS might evolve in the longer term. This section of the application is designed to gather information regarding what specific concept(s) could be evaluated if the proposed TLD is introduced, how you propose the evaluation should be done, and what information would be learned that might be instructive in the long-term management of the DNS. Well-considered and articulated responses to this section will be positively viewed in the selection process. Matters you should discuss in this section include:

The utility of this proposal as a proof of concept for future TLD introductions is described in E29 through E32.

E29. What concepts are likely to be proved/disproved by evaluation of the introduction of this TLD in the manner you propose?

This proposal offers the chance to evaluate an entirely new business model for providing TLD registry services. The model offers a number of advantages over the existing structures:

  • Marketing and business administration of the TLD is performed by one company, while technical service is provided by another (stimulating price competition) allowing each company to focus on its strengths and ensure top-quality performance in all areas.

  • Stability is enhanced because the Registry Operator is accountable to the Sponsoring Organization (and ultimately to ICANN) for meeting performance standards. If the Registry Operators fails to meet the standards, the Sponsoring Organization can select another Registry Operator quickly and efficiently, without the need for a re-delegation of the TLD.

  • There will be new opportunities for technically adept providers to offer services as Registry Operators. As the number of TLDs increases, there will be a competitive market for Registry Operators, and Sponsoring Organizations can select the operators who will provide the most efficient, stable service for the registries.

  • The Sponsoring Organization will allocate funds to organizations working around the world to expand Internet use and access, while maintaining sufficient financial resources to operate and promote the TLD.

The successful execution of this model will give ICANN another mechanism to promote the growth of the Internet through a consensus-based, private-sector, bottom-up framework.

E30. How do you propose that the results of the introduction should be evaluated? By what criteria should the success or lack of success of the TLD be evaluated?

There are several types of success that should be evaluated for the proposed TLD, and several criteria to evaluate each type.

E30.1. Business Model Success

  • Does the TLD operate in a consistent, robust, and stable manner?

  • If there are technical problems, is the Sponsoring Organization able to correct them through its position as customer of the Registry Operator, or find another source of technical services to replace the Registry Operator?

  • What percentage of the time is the system unavailable to accept registrations?

  • Can the Sponsoring Organization and Registry Operator conduct business on an economically viable basis, while providing users with economical access to name registration services?

E30.2. Innovation Success

  • Do third-party vendors develop new products and services that take advantage of the capabilities of the new TLD?

  • Does use of the TLD penetrate a wide range of products and services?

  • How many registered names in the TLD are connected to devices that are not web servers, mail servers, or ftp servers?

E30.3 Market Success

  • How many names have been registered in the TLD?

  • What percentage of the names registered are "lame delegations," compared to the percentages for other TLDs?

  • What percentage of the names registered have been disputed?

  • How many registrars are registering names in the TLD?

E31. In what way would the results of the evaluation assist in the long-range management of the DNS?

This TLD incorporates a number of new concepts, including the business model, the TLD itself, and how the TLD will be used. Evaluating the success of the TLD in each of those areas will provide a valuable comparison of this approach and earlier approaches to registry services. ICANN can use this evaluation to guide its choices for the introduction of future TLDs, and prospective registries can use the teachings of this TLD to structure their proposed introduction plans. The result will be better-informed decisions and a more robust, efficient DNS.

E32. Are there any reasons other than evaluation of the introduction process that this particular TLD should be included in the initial introduction?

This TLD will promote new and unique services for Internet users. It should be introduced as soon as possible to give users those benefits. Its potential to greatly expand the number of devices connected to the Internet will help drive demand for future TLDs.

Introducing .one now will strengthen the evolving ICANN processes, by expanding the use of the DNS rather than proprietary systems that are not accountable to the Internet community.

.one will also add credibility to the process of introducing TLDs. It shows that new TLDs can be innovative and can expand the use of the Internet into new areas that are unserved today. There are clear and compelling reasons why .one will be good for the Internet, and its benefits show how new TLDs can produce positive results.


Copyright © 2000 Group One Registry, Inc.