Comments on ICANN Draft

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

While I am generally pleased with the draft, I must echo
the comments of others who have stated that there is
little or no language about the selection of the initial
board, nor how that board is held accountable to
any stakeholders.

Further, and more specifically, there is no language
whatsoever dealing with the addition of new TLDs.

If, as the draft suggests, NSI continues to run com/net/org
as it is doing, this perpetuates the situation we have
now in which many companies, some of which who have
been waiting for almost three years, remain outside of
the roots, spending significant sums of money to maintain
infrastructures that IANA indicated should be created
back in 1996 for inclusion in the roots.

In the case of Image Online Design and the .web registry,
the company has been spending time and money to
maintain a functional registry since July of 1996. These
ongoing delays are inexcusable.

If the ICANN is to be created, there must be some provision
for those companies who have been patiently participating
in this process for almost three years now. The original
Green Paper called for initial addition of TLDs pending
the full operation of the New Corporation. I submit that
this is a good idea, and should be implemented.

Without this, I suspect that we're in for yet another year of
political fighting over the Naming Support Organization,
and nothing will change. I would personally find this
intolerably distressing.

In short, these companies have waited long enough. They've
shown commitment to the process, and are willing to meet
any reasonable technical criteria set down. Let's get some
competition in the name industry.

Christopher Ambler