Re: [ga] Comments submitted to New gTLDs Evaluation team : Section 2

To: "Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] Comments submitted to New gTLDs Evaluation team : Section 2
From: "J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 21:35:37 +0100
Cc: <richard.hill@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <003501c3f940$0fda6520$2a55fc3e@r6yll>
References: <003501c3f940$0fda6520$2a55fc3e@r6yll>
Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thank you for this study. Impressive work.

If this document may still be reviewed, I would suggest that you also address the normal case of a TLD which would comply with RFC 920 principles. This could be a network of users, or could be registrants, forming their own multiorganization TLD with no commercial intents in mind (at least in term of domain name sales). With absolutely no interest in the ICANN's registrar system. With a cost to ICANN (as documented by the Linux community in the past) of $ 12: $ 5 to open the letter, $ 5 to add the data in the root file and $ 2 for ICANN charities (permitting them to claim for tax exemptions).

jfc

At 13:33 22/02/04, Richard Henderson wrote:

This is a copy of my proposals, listed after my comments (which have been posted separately as Section 1) submitted to Miriam Sapiro and Sebastien Bachollet:

References:
- [ga] Comments submitted to New gTLDs Evaluation team : Section 2
  - From: Richard Henderson

Prev by Date: [ga] Comments submitted to New gTLDs Evaluation team : Section 2
Next by Date: [ga] read together
Previous by thread: [ga] Comments submitted to New gTLDs Evaluation team : Section 2
Next by thread: [ga] read together
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread