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

["Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2 Apr 2010, at 12:13, Phil Buckingham wrote:

> 
> 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 .

Phil

The list has public archives

ICANN has a mandate for transparency

People have complained about lack of representation etc., in the past etc.,

So I'd actually see your comment as being "out of hand"

Regards

Michele


> 
> 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

Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://mneylon.tel
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612
UK: 0844 484 9361
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business  
Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845