ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[4gtld-guide]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

dotHamburg comments on DAG4

  • To: <4gtld-guide@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: dotHamburg comments on DAG4
  • From: Oliver Süme <sueme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:34:00 +0200

 

Dear ICANN-Team,

 

For the 4th Draft Applicant Guidebook we have comments and change requests
by which we are aiming to get a fair and timely treatment on our way to
acquire our own identity on the Internet:

 

 

RE Timeline / ICANN Summit

**************************

Again we urge ICANN to finalize the gTLD process and start accepting new
gTLD applications. Any actions which may facilitate this are highly welcome,
like the proposed “ICANN Summit” in September.

 

 

RE 4.2.3 Community Priority Evaluation Criteria

***********************************************

The ccTLDs are geographically and geopolitically based top-level domains
which are based on the RFC 1591 which states for the administrator of a

ccTLD:

 

“These administrators are performing a public service on behalf of the
Internet community.”

“The designated manager is the trustee of the top-level domain for both the
nation, in the case of a country code, and the global Internet community.”

 

We ask that the same is self-evident for applicants for a GeoTLD (incl.

cities, regions, cultural and other geographical and geopolitical strings). 

 

For this reason we claim:

 

> One extra point in the Community Priority Evaluation should be given 

> if the organization of a GeoTLD applicant is based on a sound
multi-stakeholder community of the 

> GeoName concerned.

 

 

RE Treatment of incomplete Applications

***************************************

We expect that the provisions in paragraph 1.1.2.8 (String Contention)

 

“… if an application is identified as being part of a contention set, string
contention resolution procedures will not begin until all applications in
the contention set have completed all aspects of evaluation, including
dispute resolution, if applicable.”

 

will be used in competing applications (contention sets) to take speculative
advantage of intentionally caused delays by incomplete applications.

 

For this reason we claim:

 

> Applicants should be given limited time of max. 4 weeks to mend 

> incomplete

> applications parts.

 

 

Oliver Süme

Chairman

 

Initiative dotHAMBURG e.V. 

(.hamburg top-level domain)

Gertigstrasse 28

22303 Hamburg 

 

Fon: +49 (0) 40 380 89 80

Fax: +49 (0) 40 380 89 810

 

sueme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

www.dothamburg.de

 

 



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy