Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)

    New gTLDs Board favors more open sTLD process
    posted by Mueller on Thursday June 26 2003, @06:04AM

    ICANN's draft RFP on adding new sponsored top-level domains was released (as has become a tradition) the day before it was to be discussed at the Montreal meeting. The draft RFP contained a shocker: ICANN's staff proposed only to accept applications from applicants who proposed sponsored domains three years ago. This narrowed the field to 4 or 5 applications, and bitterly disappointed organizations that had invested big money in preparing for the sTLD additions promised by ICANN.

    The draft RFP also contained an important indication that ICANN will overhaul its TLD addition process and that even the sponsored-unsponsored distinction is up for review and possibly elimination. This step was seen as a response by the new Twomey administration to demands from businesses, NTIA and government for a regularly scheduled and more objective TLD addition procedures (e.g., the Syracuse University White Paper).

    The Board resisted the grandfather clause. The normally quiet Helmut Schinck objected that it was never really approved by the Board. Ultimately, Amadeu Abril made an alternative proposal that eliminates grandfathering restriction and allowed new sponsored applications. It also proposed a phased-in application process and instructed the CEO to start a registry accreditation process. The Board noted his concerns favorably and called for them to be considered during the comment process.

      ICANNWatch Login  


    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

      Related Links  
  • Dr. Paul Twomey
  • DNS White Paper
  • US Nat'l Telecom & Info Admin.
  • Syracuse University White Paper
  • draft RFP
  • More on New gTLDs
  • Also by Mueller
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Board favors more open sTLD process | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 17 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    June 24th
    by PageHowe on Thursday June 26 2003, @08:39AM (#11855)
    User #3551 Info

    now i realize i am just a jilted applicant, but sense ICANN doesnt get accountability anywhere else.. here my brief read on "THE PLAN"

    1) Did anyone actually see this June 24th.??

    2) isnt the follwing the weakest comment you have ever seen...especially in a "fair, open and transparent manner" organization.

    Any other questions regarding this RFP following the application period should be addressed in writing to general-counsel@icann.org (oral inquiries will not be accepted). Directing questions, or attempting to engage in conversations with members of the ICANN staff, Board of Directors, outside legal counsel, or consultants between the time this RFP is issued and until the Board makes its final decision could be grounds for summary rejection of the application (see Open and Transparent Communications below).

    3) heres the new bottom up process.

    The Board, in consultation with ICANN President Paul Twomey..........

    4) they didnt publish schedule B as to who can reapply. We were put in limbo by the outside staff.
    Page Howe
    kids Domains INc
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    ICANN's New Board -- Fill in my blanks!
    by dmehus on Friday June 27 2003, @12:18PM (#11868)
    User #3626 Info | http://doug.mehus.info/
    I think I've got the new board of directors sorted out. Please correct any mistakes, or fill in the blanks. Some of the blanks are supposed to be blank, I believe, as they've not been seated or nominated.

    ICANN Board of Directors

    * President & C.E.O.
    Dr. Paul Twomey

    * Address Supporting Organization
    (1) Lyman Chapin
    (2) Mouhamet Diop

    * Generic Names Supporting Organization
    (1) Michael Palage
    (2) Alejandro Pisanty

    * Country-Code Names Supporting Organization
    Newly formed supporting organization; therefore, no nominees or directors

    * Nominating Committee
    (1) Masanobu Katoh
    (2) Veni Markovski
    (3) Hualin Qian
    (4) Ivan Moura Campos
    (5) Vinton Cerf
    (6) Tricia Drakes
    (7) Thomas Niles
    (8) Njeri Rionge

    * Root Server System Advisory Committee

    * Security and Stability Advisory Committee
    (1) Steve Crocker

    * Government Advisory Committee
    (1) Mohd Sharil Tarmizi

    * At-Large Advisory Committee

    * Technical Liaison Group
    (1) Francisco A. Jesus Silva
    (2) John Klensin

    Also, ICANN's website didn't say Vinton Cerf was Chairman and Alejandro Pisanty was Vice Chairman. Has there been a change, or will there be? Anyone have any ideas? Karl, can you fill in my blanks or correct my mistakes?

    Lastly, what happened to the PSO?

    Doug Mehus http://doug.mehus.info/ [mehus.info]
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    I don't think anyone noticed...
    by KarlAuerbach on Friday June 27 2003, @02:38PM (#11870)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    I don't think anyone noticed but the board did not react unfavorably, and Vint Cerf indicated that he favored, moving towards a system in which TLD applicants are evaluated more on their ability and willingness to adhere to internet technical standards than on their business plans.

    To my mind, we are seeing what could well be a sea-change in the way that TLDs are handled. From my conversations with the incoming board members I perceive an open mind on these issues.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Seems there are a lot more than 4 or 5...
    by fnord (reversethis-{moc.oohay} {ta} {k2yorg}) on Thursday June 26 2003, @02:40PM (#11861)
    User #2810 Info
    Please try to get your own facts straight before coming out with the anonymous lectures, it's not like you have to interview Joe Sims or anything, the information is on the ICANN.org website, as it happens one link off the link you provided after a fashion (if you can't do basic HTML no-one is going to take you seriously anyway). 18 unsuccessful applicants last time? Not even close [icann.org]. That's the problem, the only people more moronic than ICANN are some of their critics. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Seems there are a lot more than 4 or 5...
    by Mueller (reversethis-{ude.rys} {ta} {relleum}) on Friday June 27 2003, @06:39PM (#11873)
    User #2901 Info | http://istweb.syr.edu/~mueller/
    Thanks for the correction. I was at the meeting and did not have time to go back and count the applications; more importantly, the article attempted to estimate how the field would be narrowed, i.e. who would actually reapply. That very rough estimate (this is reporting on location, mind you) was based on discussions at the Montreal meeting. Could be wrong, of course, but "4 or 5" meant "4 or 5 applicants KNOWN TO BE LIVE."

    It is quite possible that live applicants would have expanded, even if the Board hadn't indicated that it will change that restriction. Under the RFP sponsored applicants unwilling to revive their bids could assign or sell the right to someone else.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:

    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com