Dear -Jeff, I read your comment.I think that the .ftp/.gopher
domains are already part of the mix, here and now. I think that an expansion
of their uses via the "mainstream Interenet" to be accessed by the masses is something
that can be looked into when doing the all-out benefit cost analysis I propose, as
part of the "global directory" approach.
I believe that the key in making
a new gTLD operational is to apply the "best-practices" known up to date, while being
cognizant of the nightmares we've all experienced in pioneering this medium.
Most
of all, I think that the new gTLD should do more than just create more net-space,
or a name here-and-there, for the next oligopoly of domainlords (as in landlords).
The new gTLD should be something which will give the Internet sustatained relevance
in the "eyes/brains" of the masses, even in the context of wireless/bandwidth technology.
If the masses find that the Internet is relevant in their lives, user-friendly and
valuable (as in a global directory managed by ICANN and with essential roll-out/implementation
elements to provide local-control and public choice), then the gTLD needs to do that
and take people to where they want to do an offer a basis for sustained wellnes,
economic development and self-sufficiency. That is, the new gTLD shall offer
a new and improved Internet, not just a plethora of new names, which if not managed
and coordinated in a collaborative and strategic fashion, may have little untility/value
at most local levels, and will have only limited value as a "global" medium.
In sum, the gTLD approach needs to make sense and be desireable as a resource
for the massess, while offering a managed roll-out and a playing field for those
who have a standing in sharing a name, yet for whatever reason were not able to get
there soon enough before another similarly legitimate business did (or worse yet,
could not get beat the cybersquatter to the punch!).
Let's build upon the
best-practice and what we know. We do not have perfect information but do have more
than enough to stakeout a stretegy. Questions and issues will continue to mushroom,
and to the extent that we can list them, prioritize them, define them, categorize
them, and discuss them, the better -- but more importantly in this process is that
all players/stakeholders to be affected to be offer a legitimate forum, a shot at,
and an avenue to discuss them and decide/vote on them, and then, choose a plan.
The work of the workgroups involved was helpful but needs to continue in order
to develop an implementation plan which addresses all these issues, to the extent
possible. Also, such an implementation plan should mention how the new gTLD will
be managed, by whom, through whom, and with whose participation/collaboration to
create a working framework to ensure relvance, continuity and sustainability of this
medium. Finally, an implemantation plan should be reviewed and commeted--not
always publicly, and not always privately--by all stakeholders, and at minimum by
all nation-states, either through their elected ICANN Board Member, or directly through
ICANN, before the gTLD can be rolled-out.
Perhaps all this sounds a bit
burdensome. However, slow in this case is fast (as soft is hard). Much is at stake
here to leave this to the "initiated" who have arrived already, or the ones having
access right now, when much is to come and many are to join. Let's put our
heads together to create something that when built, people will stay for the long-run
(i.e., something that is user-friendly, inclusive and coordinated--not fragmented,
exclusive, nor organic). Remember that to get to where all of us want to go, we need
to have a sustainable and defensible strategy which can stand scrutiny, competition,
and "over-regulatory" tendencies. If ICANN maintains a hold on managing its first-born
gTLD, this may be perhaps the one step to make, rather than break the Internet. The
new gTLD (notice the singular; however, I'm not married to anyone .xyz in particular)
will be OUR opportunity to do things right, with what we have, and to do it while
getting a broad-based consensus and buy-in. How we get there is all within
the existing dynamics and the existing energy driving this/these issue(s) of a new
gTLD. The timeframe to do all of the pre-steps and next steps can still be
accomplished within a few months. Not taking these basics steps and pursuing
a more down-to-the-local-level planning/implementation process may take us back to
where we are now sooner than it took us to get here. Let's do it right; let's
do it strategically and let's do it wisely.
Thanks for your brief note.
Very
Truly Yours,
Nestor Requeno
Los Angeles, California USA