Comment by Connecting.nyc Inc. on the Draft Strategic Plan

[Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

January 9, 2010

Comments by Connecting.nyc Inc. on ICANN's

*DRAFT **STRATEGIC PLAN for **JULY 2011 -- JUNE 2014 *

When New York City's Queens Community Board 3 passed its Internet 
Empowerment Resolution on April 19, 2001, it did so primarily in the 
hope of improving local communication. To help make this point about the 
desperate need for improved local communication, I often compare the 
communication resources of our Community District with those of Terre 
Haute, Indiana, where I spent a couple of my college years. Terre Haute 
has 2 TV stations, 8 radio stations, and a daily newspaper to serve its 
residents needs. Community District 3, with nearly twice the residents, 
doesn't have a single TV station, not a single radio station, nor a 
daily newspaper. New York City communicates with and to the world in a 
superlative manner, but it is severely challenged when it comes to 
intra-city communication. Too frequently it's only disaster that 
attracts the local media.
So when we saw the prospect of our neighborhoods, civic organizations, 
schools, artists, local retailers, churches, mosques, synagogues, and 
government having the opportunity to address the complexities of city 
life with the full DNS-empowered Internet, we jumped at the prospect. 
That was 10 years ago.
I've been an observer and/or participant in developing a process for 
issuing new TLDs since ICANN's birth and understand the difficulties it 
has faced. It has been a fascinating process to watch and I commend the 
thousands who have contributed to its maturation over the years. But in 
reading over the draft Strategic Plan, I noted that there's a lacuna in 
the document -- the treatment of cities.
Cities are our most complex institutions and they remain TLD-less. With 
the DNS developed during the heyday of suburbia, I understand the 
original omission. But I find it disconcerting that the Draft Strategic 
Plan continues the neglect them. You might say "Hey, cities are eligible 
for TLDs." And that's correct. But are they prepared?
Today the organizations that operate the machines that facilitate the 
registration and sale of domain names are leading the development of 
city-TLDs. It's as if the city decided to build a football stadium and 
in making its plans it only spoke to the construction company - not to 
the fans, the teams, the players, the surrounding community, the 
architect, the financiers, the marketers... How has it come to this?
However, I've seen positive signs over the past months, particularly the 
strong ICANN participation at the City-TLD Governance and Best Practices 
workshop at the recent Internet Governance Forum in Vilnius. With 
ICANN's Chair Peter Dengate Thrush actively participating in the 
conversation, and with two future ICANN board members workshop panelists 
(Bonjour fellas), I'm hopeful that the needs of cities will be addressed 
in the completed Strategic Plan.
To that end I offer the following suggestions proffered at the IGF's 
City-TLD Workshop for consideration in formulating a city element for 
inclusion in the final Strategic Plan.
   *

     City-TLD proponents should prepare a preliminary definition of
     public interest TLDs, using resources such as the Paris
     Understanding
     <http://coactivate.org/projects/campaign-for.nyc/paris-understanding>.


   *

     An organization of proponents of public interest city-TLDs should
     be formed.

   *

     Literature should be prepared to inform mayors of the world of the
     utility of city-TLDs, and that it be distributed through their
     best practices organizations.

   *

     Via petition and other mechanisms, the advantages of a thoughtful
     and rapid approval process for city-TLDs should be presented to
     the ICANN.

   *

     Such petition to the ICANN should note that the operation of city
     government, the quality of city life, and the sustainability of
     cities (and perhaps the planet) will be improved by the thoughtful
     issuance and development of city-TLDs.

   *

     Such petition should also note the unsuitability of the proposed
     filing fees, technology requirements, and registry/registrar
     separation for city-TLDs proposed in the Draft Application
     Guidebook, especially for cities in less developed areas.

   *

     The petition should note that the acceptance of city-TLDs as a
     distinct category of TLDs, governed under the existing laws of
     nation-states; unencumbered by traditional concerns about
     trademark stress; and governed by responsible entities will free
     the ICANN to focus on more problematic TLD categories.

   *

     That nation-states be contacted through the members of the ICANN's
     Government Advisory Committee (GAC) and other channels and
     requested to assemble a list of cities with an existing interest
     in TLDs.

   *

     That a list of cities proposing public interest TLDs be submitted
     to ICANN.

   *

     That a dedicated unit within ICANN be created to process public
     interest city-TLD applications.

   *

     That cities on such a list be processed and approved in an
     expedited manner.

   *

     That the city-TLD advocacy organization create city-to-city
     processes and communication channels to share best practices.

So today we have Abidjan, Accra, Adana, Ad-Damma-m, Ad-Dawh.ah,Adelaide, 
Adis Abeba, A-gra, Ahmada-ba-d, Ahva-z, Al-Bas.rah, Al-Iskandari-yah, 
Al-Khart.u-m, Al-Kuwayt, Allaha-ba-d, Al-Madi-nah, Al-Mana-mah, Almaty, 
Al-Maws.il, Al-Qa-hirah, 'Amma-n, Amritsar, Amsterdam, Ankara, Anshan, 
Antananarivo, Ar-Riya-d, Asansol, As,gabat, Ash-Sha-riqah, Asunción, 
Athínai, Atlanta, Auckland, Austin, Baghda-d, Bak?, Bamako, Bandung, 
Baoding, Baotou, Barcelona, Barquisimeto, Barranquilla, Batam, Bayru-t, 
Beijing, Belém, Belo Horizonte, Bengaluru, Benin City, Beograd, Berlin, 
Bhilai, Bhopa-l, Bhubaneswar, Birmingham, Birmingham, Bogotá, Boston, 
Brasília, Brazzaville, Brisbane, Bruxelles, Bucaramanga, Bucures,ti, 
Budapest, Buenos Aires, Buffalo, Bursa, Busan, Calgary, Cali, Campinas, 
Cape Town, Caracas, Cartagena, Casablanca, Cebu, C(el'abinsk, 
Chandi-garh, Changchun, Changsha, Changzhou, Charkiv, Charlotte, 
Chengdu, Chennai, Chicago, Chittagong, Chongqing, Cincinnati, Ciudad de 
Guatemala, Ciudad de México, Ciudad de Panamá, Ciudad Juárez, Cixi, 
Cleveland, Cochabamba, oimbatore, Colombo, Columbus, Conakry, Córdoba, 
Cotonou, Curitiba, Daegu, Daejeon, Dakar, Dalian, Dallas, Daqing, Dar es 
Salaam, Datong, Davao, Delhi, Denver, Detroit, Dhaka, Dhanba-d, Dimashq, 
Dniprope.trovs'k, Done.c'k, Douala, Dubayy, Dublin, Durban, Düsseldorf, 
Edmonton, El Djazaïr, Es.faha-n, Faisalabad, Fès, Florianópolis, 
Fortaleza, Frankfurt, Freetown, Fresno, Fukuoka, Fuzhou, Gaoxiong, 
Gaziantep, George Town, Ghazzah, Glasgow, Goiânia, Grand Rapids, 
Greensboro, Greenville, Guadalajara, Guangzhou, Guayaquil, Guilin, 
Guiyang, Gujra-nwa-la, Guwa-ha-ti, Gwalior, Gwangju, Haikou, H.alab, 
Hamamatsu, Hamburg, Hangzhou, Ha Noi, Harare, Harbin, Hartford, Hefei, 
Helsinki, Himeji, Hiroshima, Hohhot, Hong Kong, Houston, Huai'an, 
Huainan, Huizhou, Hydera-ba-d, Hydera-ba-d, Ibadan, Indianapolis, 
Indore, I.stanbul, I.zmir, Jabalpur, Jacksonville, Jaipur, Jakarta, 
Jamshedpur, Jekaterinburg, Jiddah, Jilin, Jinan, Jining, Jixi, João 
Pessoa, Jodhpur, Johannesburg, Joinville, Ka-bol, Kaduna, Kampala, Kano, 
Ka-npur, Kansas City, Kara-chi, Ka-t.hma-nd.au, Katowice, Kazan', 
Khulna, Kinshasa, Kitakyu-shu-, Klang, København, Kochi, Kolha-pur, 
Kolkata, Köln, Konya, Kozhikode, Krasnojarsk, Krung Thep, Kuala Lumpur, 
Kumamoto, Kumasi, Kunming, Kyïv, Lagos, La Habana, Lahore, Lanzhou, La 
Paz, Las Vegas, Leeds, León, Lille, Lima, Linyi, Lisboa, Liuzhou, 
Liverpool, Lomé, London, Los Angeles, Louisville, Luanda, Lubumbashi, 
Lucknow, Ludhia-na, Luoyang, Lusaka, Lyon, Maceió, Madrid, Madurai, 
Maiduguri, Makassar, Makkah, Managua, Manaus, Manchester, Mandalay, 
Manila, Mannheim, Maputo, Maracaibo, Maracay, Marseille, Mashhad, 
Mbuji-Mayi, Medan, Medellín, Meerut, Melbourne, Memphis, Mérida, Miami, 
Milano, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Minsk, Monrovia, Monterrey, Montevideo, 
Montréal, Moskva, Mudanjiang, Multa-n, Mumbai, München, Muqdisho, 
Nagoya, Na-gpur, Naha, Nairobi, Nanchang, Nanjing, Nanning, Napoli, 
Na-shik, Nashville, Natal, Ndjamena, Newcastle upon Tyne, New Orleans, 
my favorite, New York and 165 other cities with 1,000,000 plus 
populations (see City Populations at 
http://www.citypopulation.de/world/Agglomerations.html) anticipating 
access to their TLDs. But are they aware of the possibilities?
I don't know about these other cities, but I'm certain that New York 
City will make productive use of the TLD. However, I will note that one 
of the goals of the IGF's City TLD Workshop was that it be a gathering 
place where cities might begin a collaboration on the development of 
their TLDs. In this regard the workshop was a failure. No cities showed 
up. And to my knowledge, no cities attend the ICANN meetings.
So who patches the lacuna and presents the case for the potential of 
city-TLDs? This is surely an ICANN responsibility. One can not treat the 
.paris TLD the same as .shop! I've also suggested that my government has 
much to gain from participating in the patching. Indeed, the present 
administration has advocated for an urban policy that crosses 
departmental silos. What better way to breach bureaucratic walls than 
empowering U.S. cities with TLDs, rethinking the ways we address the 
breadth of human needs from the vantage point of a DNS empowered Internet.
We at Connecting.nyc Inc. stand ready to assist ICANN in this important 
endeavor.
Sincerely,

Thomas Lowenhaupt

-----------------------------------------------

Thomas Lowenhaupt, Founder & Chair
Connecting.nyc Inc.

tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Jackson Hts., NYC 11372

718 639 4222

web: http://connectingnyc.org <http://connectingnyc.org/>

wiki: http://bit.ly/OurWiki

blog: http://bit.ly/OurBlog

Connecting.nyc Inc. is a New York State not-for-profit created to 
educate New Yorkers about the use of the .nyc TLD as a public interest 
resource. We trace our existence to the Internet Empowerment Resolution 
passed by a New York City Community Board in 2001.While our focus is on 
the .nyc TLD, we've come to see that the fruition of .nyc requires 
collaboration between cities. As such a goal for 2011 is to engage in a 
city-TLD standardization process.