Richard J. Sexton wrote:
>gTLD registrieS ? There's only one... or does this mean "prospective
>registreis" ?
Constituencies are supposed to self-define, so it means what the group
decides it means. From what I've read on the lists, there is support for
including "prospective registries."
ICANN has asked for comment, however, on whether the gTLD and ccTLD
distinction should be dropped in favor of an "open TLD" and "closed TLD"
distinction. See below.
-- Bret
=-----------------------------------------------------------=
>From http://www.icann.org/dnso/dnsoupdate.html
Further Comment Requested:
In order to more fully explore an issue raised by one comment submitted
in reaction to the draft ICANN Bylaw changes the ICANN Board seeks
further comment on the following question:
Should the initial DNSO Constituencies currently identified as "ccTLD
registries" and "gTLD registries" be re-categorized as "open registries"
and "closed registries," identified according to whether the registry is
open to any registrant, worldwide ("open"), or is instead limited to
certain registrants based on geography, intended use, or other criteria
("closed")?
Please submit comments to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
=-----------------------------------------------------------=
