Coming up in about an hour — the public ICANN board meeting. Although there are big issues swirling around, most of our discussions this morning will probably be about incremental developments.
This is frustrating for people who would like to be proposing new top-level domains. As of yet, we don't have a process for them to enter. Back in March 2006, we passed a resolution about our intent to advance the implementation of such a process. A lot has happened since then, and the organization within ICANN that gives policy advice about generic top-level domains (the GNSO) plans to finish its own process in time for the board to consider the process in Los Angeles in October.
But it's difficult for anyone to say when the process will be implemented. It should include internationalized domain names (non-ASCII names), in my view, and there may still be policy questions about that. Many people wish that we could be clearer and more deterministic about deadlines for processes. I share that wish.
=== my favorite picture from this morning, taken by Joi Ito.
I've heard this idea before from certain ICANN staffers that we need to tie the new gTLD process to the IDN process. The best ratiionale I can get from them is that to allow ASCII applications to precede IDN applications would somehow be discriminatory or unfair. I don't see that argument at all. Given ICANN's history on new gTLDs, it sounds like a convenient reason to delay again.
For my part, I think ICANN should launch the new gTLD process as soon as it is ready. If it includes the ability to request IDN-based gTLDs, then we can all shout “hooray” in the many languages of the world. If not, their time will follow soon.
– Bret
well, the process draft inside the gnso includes idns, so the whole thing is being dealt with at once. the gnso has promised to get us their policy in august. frustrating, I agree.
Understood. Just color me frustrated at the fact that the Board grants Verisign a monopoly on .COM without deferring to the GNSO but waits for the Council to act to bring competition to .COM.