Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] New Revised SRSU Text

[frederick felman <ffelman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

http://www.unicef.org/supply/index_54167.html


On 7/22/10 3:06 PM, "Milton L Mueller" <mueller@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> That's the longest and strangest way of saying "I was wrong" I have ever read.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eric Brunner-Williams
>> 
>> On the .ngo issue.
>> 
>> I would like to shed some light on the .ngo discussion by observing
>> that I am in possession of an RFI by an NGO (who's name is not
>> trademarked) which, upon several readings, appears to solicit
>> responses from potential providers of what I view as a restricted,
>> single-registrant, single-user TLD, consistent with, except for the
>> use of a brand as the criteria for existence (and presumably, for any
>> such application prevailing in any string contention set), the
>> .bRO-SRSU model offered by Kristina.
>> 
>> It is the case that there is at least one NGO which is informed, and
>> consents in principle, to policy development favoring the type of
>> application it seeks to submit to ICANN.
>> 
>> The information came to me directly from the NGO in question, and was
>> not solicited.
>> 
>> I don't think this means the .xRO-WXYZ drill is anywhere close to
>> having final values for {x, W, X, Y, and Z} or the associated
>> meanings, but it is no longer a proof by assertion that there exists a
>> party qualified for, and seeking, a ".ngo".
>> 
>> Eric
>