Re: Relationship of CORE and ISOC, timetable for current gTLD

[Paul Ezra Kautz <pek@iu.big-island.va.us>]

Kent Crispin wrote:
>Dave, the membership of CORE is composed entirely of registrar
>representatives, and the board of trustees is half composed of
>registrar representatives.  There is no other oversight whatsoever
>defined for this group. [...] Oversight, including the creation of new TLDs,
>should remain in a committee: The ROC - Registry Oversight Committee,
>a group of not fewer than 12 people who are elected equally from the
>membership of the IETF and the ISOC.  

I agree that there needs to be more community oversight. I also
think that the registrars should have a voice in decision-making.

I'd like to see some sort of legislative structure - bicameral,
with CORE on one hand and some body elected from the community
on the other. An ITLD Congress. As in US Congress, both houses 
would need to approve legislation - a new domain or policy or whatever. 

To extend, we already have an executive branch. The bureaucracy 
consists of IANA, Paul Vixie, and the rest of the cogs and gears
of DNS.

To extend even further, I see this as a reasonable way to determine
fees. The houses come up with a budget for operational costs -
running the root servers and the central registries and so on.
Based on this, CORE taxes itself.

This also makes it easy to handle chartered ITLDs, but I think
I'll talk about that in another message.

Paul Kautz