RE: [gtld-council] Issues with "sunrise" and "landrush"
I would support the need for a more uniform approach on "sunrise/landrush". Thanks to Tim and others who took the trouble to develop a document. Have to read it in detail before endorsement, but certainly the concept of a more uniform approach make sense for new registries. Marilyn -----Original Message----- From: owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 7:44 AM To: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [gtld-council] Issues with "sunrise" and "landrush" Hello All, One of the issues raised by Kiyoshi Tsuru at the meeting in Wellington was considering how to scale the sunrise/landrush process when a new TLD starts. Each gTLD operator in the 2000 and 2004 rounds has used a different approach to sunrise and landrush. There is now substantial experience in the registry and registrar community but often new operators don't necessarily take advantage of this expertise. If we introduce more TLDs,it would be useful to have a standardised approach that minimises the cost for registrants and suppliers. Attached is an example of a submission from one Registrar, GoDaddy, that might stimulate some thinking on this topic. I recommend we consider setting up a small working group to consider some approaches to this as part of the new policy on new TLDs relating to contractual conditions (which currently often include sunrise processes). Regards, Bruce Tonkin ________________________________ From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, 10 May 2006 9:25 PM To: Ross Rader; Bruce Tonkin; Thomas Keller Subject: Landrush reform for consideration with PDP-Dec05 We realize that the call for papers and comments has expired and apologize for this late submission. However, we hope the GNSO will accept the attached for consideration with PDP-Dec05. Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Tim Ruiz Vice President Corp. Development & Policy Planning The Go Daddy Group, Inc.