Stef and all, Einar Stefferud wrote: > I may be mistaken, but it seems clear to me that ICANN calling for a > gTLD constituency for DNSO falls rtight in line with all that we have > been doing in ORSC over the last many months. In what way might that be Stef? It seems to me that the ORSC for months was against structured constituencies for these past many months... > > > Who should be members of a gTLD contituency is not the exisiting gTLD > registries and the Prospoective gTLD registries , msot of which are > already represented in our ORSC Staging Root Zone, and maintained by > Richard Sexton. And what gTLD's might those be? > > > I cam imagine others who might be included as members, like gTLD SLD > registrants, or maybe even lower level gTLD zone administrators, but > the core of the contituency should represent the gTLD registries. This seems obviously divisive in nature, and by design as well. > > > So, lets just get to it and form up the obvious constituency > membership. Bad idea for many obvious reasons. On such reason is that in doing so you are classifying members and thereby represents a level of disenfranchisment which is in effect a restraint of trade. > > > Comments?...\Stef Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact Number: 972-447-1894 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
