NOTICE-97-01
ACTION: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
SUBJECT: Review of Representation of Constituencies in the gTLD-MoU
Policy Oversight Committee
1. How many people do you think can constitute a functioning Policy
Oversight Committee?
[1-5 __] [5-10 __] [10-15 __] [15-20 X] [20-30 __] [Other (specify number) __]
---------
2. Which interest classes require representation in the gTLD-MoU Policy
Oversight Committee?
End-Users [yes__] [no XX]
Internet Service Providers [yes XX] [no__]
Telecommunications Companies [yes__] [no XX]
Public Interest Groups [yes XX] [no__]
Business and Advertising Interests [yes XX] [no__]
Content Providers [yes XX] [no__]
Internet Technical Infrastructure Interests [yes XX] [no__]
Software Suppliers [yes__] [no XX]
Trademark Community/Law [yes XX] [no__]
Intergovernmental Interests [yes XX] [no__]
Domain Name Registrars [yes XX] [no__]
Other (please specify, providing a short justification of this constituency to
be represented in DNS-oversight matters) ___________________________
3. Which of the listed interest classes above do you think are under-represented
in the gTLD-MoU Policy Oversight Committee?
End-Users ___
Internet Service Providers _X_
Telecommunications Companies ___
Public Interest Groups _X_
Business and Advertising Interests ___
Content Providers _X_
Internet Technical Infrastructure Interests ___
Software Suppliers ___
Trademark/Legal ___
Intergovernmental Interests ___
Domain Name Registrars ___
Other (please specify) ___________________________
4. For each of the interests classes you have indicated as under-represented in
the gTLD-MoU Policy Oversight Committee:
Should each representative be selected from groups within a class (e.g., trade
or other associations) or directly from members of that class?
> In general it seems much easier to have existing or prospective groups pick
> representatives rather than trying to select from among the members of the
> class.
What is the appropriate procedure for nominating representatives for each of
the classes that you have indicated are under-represented?
> My selection suggestions below give organizations in each area the right to
> pick their own representatives, as is done for all existing PoC members, so
> it would be up to them how they chose to do this including what "nominations"
> procedure.
What is the appropriate procedure for selecting representative for each of the
classes that you have indicated are under-represented?
> Appropriate representation of ISPs and, to some extent, content providers can
> be arranged by providing one voting participant in the POC from each of the
> current and propsective five continental NiCs (RIPE, APnic, ARIN, etc.).
> For public service groups, I am not certain what would be best. Perhaps
> just giving the Electronic Frontier Founation a representative.
What is the length of term each representative should serve for each of the
classes that you have indicated are under-represented? If desired, please
include suggested mandatory term limits.
> I think a two year term is reasonable and three would not be too bad. One year
> is too short and four or more too long.
5. Please discuss below any other considerations vis-`-vis the structure of the gTLD-
MoU Policy Oversight Committee not covered in this questionnaire.
> You fail to even mention the possibility of a need for "geographic"
> diversity in representation. While the Internet is a global phenomena
> and I would certainly not want to go so far as to have many direct
> national or linguistic or such representatives, I strongly believe the
> current POC goes to far in the direction of only permitting gobally
> averaged and homognized voices. The above recommended continental NiC
> representatives will provide a means for European, Asia/Pacific, Latin
> American, African, and North American continental voices to be heard
> and differences to be considered.
[END]
=====================================================================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1 978-287-4877(tel) dee@cybercash.com
318 Acton Street +1 978-371-7148(fax) dee@world.std.com
Carlisle, MA 01741 USA +1 703-620-4200(main office, Reston, VA)
http://www.cybercash.com http://www.privacy.org/ipc