Comments on EOI

[a <a@xxxxx>]

I am generally opposed to adding new tld's, as it is my perception that
most of the tld's added thus far are not being visited much at all.  Of
the newer tld's added, .info is very likely the only one with any real
use by the average user.  Tld's like .aero, .pro, .museum. .biz and
others I cannot recall being used or visited by much of anyone and I
rarely see them in our caching proxy logs.

Although I am generally opposed to expansion of tld's, I would support
the expansion if they promoted other worthwhile goals of ICANN and IANA.
For example, I would support establishment of new tld's if they
supported the goal of moving the internet from IPv4 to IPv6.

Especially in the case of the .xxx tld, I could see this being a driver
toward IPv6 adoption if the approvals are conditioned upon all the DNS
and other servers using the new tld's were required to use IPv6 only,
and that any new tld zone found to contain "A" records for IPv4 would be
suspended and removed from the zone.

Right now, although many surveys show that there are less than 2 years
of IPv4 addresses remaining in the free pool, noone seems to want to be
the first to make a move, mostly because there is no end user push to
adopt IPv6.  If an applicant for a new tld such as .xxx has really
compelling content, this action could have a positive effect in driving
end users to start demanding IPv6 connectivity in order to access the
compelling content.  This will help with the drive to adopt IPv6.  It
also will tend to moderate the number of applicants for the new tld's,
as only those with really compelling content will be likely to apply
under such IPv6 only rules.

Above all, I especially am opposed to ICANN using the new TLD's as a
revenue raising tool for ICANN.  The fees set should be based on cost,
since ICANN is non profit.  This goes for both fees charged for applying
for a new tld, and also the fees that have been tacked unto each domain
renewal of GTLD's administered by ICANN.  There needs to be a cap on the
total amount raised by the fees, and on the total staff of ICANN.