-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Message as sent to "comment-so@icann.org:
There is certainly validity to the prospect of both open and closed
TLDs in
both the ccTLD and gTLD areas. However, to further divide either
constituencies or the obvious commonalities which occur in both models
appears to be a very inefficient model. The technical and
administrative
commonalities far outweigh the differences.
In the TLDA model, a Draft Recommendation proposing a specific
treatment of
an open/closed difference could be proposed much in the same manner
differing uses of technology are proposed through IETF Internet
Drafts.
This allows for a wide range of opinions to be expressed on a given
topic,
while building upon a common technical and administrative base. The
potential of further fractionalizing the constituency groups would
only
make redundant (and potentially conflicting) many efforts required for
both
models.
Perhaps, again using the IETF basic model as an example, an approach
might
be to establish TLDA working groups to address the open/closed model
differences, as well as other areas of tacit incongruity.
I would welcome any feedback on these observations.
+++++
"Theree's nothing more challenging than getting what you wished for."
Gene Marsh
President, anycastNET Incorporated
interim secretary, Top Level Domain Association
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
iQA/AwUBN0G8nHKYiraY8fZCEQIqlACeNpHrwiWwxX+gAuBUy6/r2K+RNa8AmwcY
E+c9DGr3U2RRuEQ5Ugia8oOt
=IFQB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----