Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] VI in practice, Rights Protection Mechanisms, Registry Agreements and Variants of TLDs

["Phil Buckingham" <pjbuckingham@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This is now getting out of hand . Bertrand de La Chapelle  has NOT submitted 
a SOI . He should not therefore be included in the "loop".
We need some "house rules " , please co chair .

Thanks


Phil Buckingham




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric Brunner-Williams" <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Milton L Mueller" <mueller@xxxxxxx>
Cc: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>; <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>; "Bertrand de La 
Chapelle" <bdelachapelle@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] VI in practice, Rights Protection Mechanisms, 
Registry Agreements and Variants of TLDs

> Just in passing, one classification scheme mentioned in a related
> context is the size of the applicant and holder pools.
>
> For the pre-ICANN gTLDs we have around 10.
>
> For the post-ICANN gTLDs we have anther around 10.
>
> For the pre-ICANN ccTLDs we have around 200.
>
> For cities with a population greater than 1M we have some low multiple
> of the aggregate of everything currently in the root.
>
> For linguistic and cultural (sub-national and trans-national) with a
> population likely to achieve 10k registrations we have some low
> multiple of the aggregate of everything currently in the root.
>
> For IDN equivalencies to cities and linguistic national, sub-national,
> and trans-national with the union of the demographic limits above,
> several multiples of the union of the cities and linguistic and
> cultural numbers, or the sum of two or more low multiple of the
> aggregate of everything currently in the root.
>
> When we get to SR instance estimation things get a bit odd. We have
> the capitalization required rather than a demographic minima, which is
> less than $1M, perhaps only a quarter of that. Unfortunately, the
> universe of marks is simply not bounded, as new marks are created, and
> expire, much faster than cities or linguistic and cultural identities.
>
> In sum, at some point we will have served all the cities, all the
> populations not served by the 3166 model, in Latin, Arabic, CJK,
> Hindi, ... At no point will we ever be able to say we've run out of
> marks. A root many multiples of its current size excites little
> concern, other than the rate of change concern. A growth that is
> unbounded does excite some concern.
>
> So while you may be right that only a few idiots may run with scissors
> while operating a SR, it is an assumption that the number of SR
> applicants will ever be below any workload threshold for ICANN's
> application evaluation resource, and that the SR model and ICANN's
> years long application planning process assuming disjoint,
> independent, registrant populations and generally available services
> are not fundamentally challenged by problems of scale.
>
> I've cc'd Bertrand as the taxa-by-scale goes to the discussion of
> categories.
>
> Eric