ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

Bayern Connect comments on the EOI

  • To: <eoi-new-gtlds@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Bayern Connect comments on the EOI
  • From: Caspar von Veltheim <caspar.veltheim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:45:12 +0100

Bayern Connect intends to apply for a .bayern TLD. We here state on points
of the EOI idea:

1. Everybody that considers to apply for a nTLDs know about this EOI. If a
significant amount needs to be filed in, in order to participate, then the
real level of interest will be illustrated.

2. It is the best way for ICANN to figure out how many applications are
going to be there as well as what the actual strings are. Only participants
in the EOI should be able to apply when the application window finally
opens. This is a huge advantage for every party involved.

3. Absolutely ­ and it should be a substantial percentage of the actual
application fee. Only then ICANN will be protected from applicants with
unsound applications. The EOI has the potential to illustrate a realistic
and sufficient picture of the real situation ­ on this basis ICANN will be
able to make a more quality and justified decision.

4. There should only be a refund if the application window does not open
after a significant part of time. But if the applicant does pay the EOI fee
and does not forward to the actual application, then the fee should not be
paid back. Again, only then unsound applications will be taken out in the

5. The EOI participant must give name of applicant, contact details,
technical infrastructue, applied string and this all should be open for

6. Every participant should be able to start operating within a short time.
Hence, a timeframe should be stated.

7+8. We don¹t see much risk in the EOI - In fact, it does take away most of
them. The only risk that plays in is that ICANN will change a lot of the
policies under which applicants apply. The EOI participant must be sure that
there are not going to be vast changes within the DAG ­ so the next version
must be the final one and I do not see any reason why it shouldn¹t be.

Thank You very much,

Caspar von Veltheim

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy