NOTICE-97-02
B. GENERAL QUESTIONS
1. Number of gTLDs
Generally, how many new gTLDs do you think should be created?
[0 __] [1-10 _X_] [10-50 __] [50-150 __] [150 or more __]
C. CHOICE OF gTLDS
1. Review of IAHC-Suggested gTLDs
How would you rate each of the following gTLD names selected by the
IAHC?
a) .firm (intended for businesses, or firms), check one of the below:
[strongly approve __] [approve _X_] [no opinion __] [disapprove __]
[strongly disapprove __]
If you disapprove or strongly disapprove, what gTLD would you suggest in
place of .firm in
this category? ______
Special note: A common suggestion is that business term-related gTLDs
like .inc, .corp, .ltd, .plc, .gmbh, .sarl should be
selected instead of general terms like ".firm". However, these terms
have legal significance and it is typically illegal to use them
unless the registering entity actually is "incorporated", a "limited
liability company", a "public listed company", etc. Verifying this
would most likely require pre-screening activities by domain name
registrars (as is the case in the UK with plc.uk and ltd.uk)
and probably result in increased registration costs and submission of
proof of related legal status. Also note that since all 2
letter TLDs are reserved for ISO 3166 country code delegations (e.g.,
.us, .fr, .au), equivalent business legal abbreviations
commonly used in other languages (e.g., "sa", "sc", "oy", "ab", and
"sl") could not be allocated.
Considering above, would you still prefer to have legal term gTLDs?
[yes__] [no__].
If so, which ones (in order of preference)? _____________________
b) .store (for businesses offering goods to purchase), check one of the
below:
[strongly approve __] [approve __] [no opinion _X_] [disapprove __]
[strongly disapprove __]
If you disapprove or strongly disapprove, what gTLD would you suggest in
place of .store in
this category? ______
Special note: There have been many suggestions that .store be replaced
by .shop which has significance in
multiple languages and, unlike .store, has related verb and noun
meanings. Do you think .store should be replaced by .shop?
[yes__] [no_X_]
c) .web (for entities emphasizing activities related to the World Wide
Web), check one of the below:
[strongly approve __] [approve __] [no opinion __] [disapprove _X_]
[strongly disapprove __]
If you disapprove or strongly disapprove, what gTLD would you suggest in
place of .web in
this category? I'm not sure how it would be used, and what separates it
from one of the
other names.
d) .arts (for entities emphasizing cultural and entertainment
activities), check one of the below:
[strongly approve __] [approve _X_] [no opinion __] [disapprove __]
[strongly disapprove __]
If you disapprove or strongly disapprove, what gTLD would you suggest in
place of .arts in
this category? ______
e) .rec (for entities emphasizing recreation/entertainment activities),
check one of the below:
[strongly approve __] [approve _X_] [no opinion __] [disapprove __]
[strongly disapprove __]
If you disapprove or strongly disapprove, what gTLD would you suggest in
place of .rec in
this category? ______
f) .info (for entities providing information services), check one of the
below:
[strongly approve __] [approve _X_] [no opinion __] [disapprove __]
[strongly disapprove __]
If you disapprove or strongly disapprove, what gTLD would you suggest in
place of .info in
this category? ______
g) .nom (for those wishing individual or personal nomenclature, i.e., a
personal nom de plume), check one of the below:
[strongly approve __] [approve __] [no opinion _X_] [disapprove __]
[strongly disapprove __]
If you disapprove or strongly disapprove, what gTLD would you suggest in
place of .nom in
this category?
Special note 1: Since this gTLD is for individuals and registrations
could number in the millions, if not hundreds of millions,
there is naturally concern about the scaleability of a personal name
space gTLD. There have been suggestions that in order to
improve the scaleability of the .nom name space, a numerical identifier
should be added to the .nom gTLD from the outset
(e.g, .nom1, .nom2, .nom3, etc.) Do you agree? [yes__] [no_X_]
Special note 2: There are often suggestions that names like .id, .me,
ind, or .per should be used as a "personal" gTLD. Please
note the following reasons for rejecting these names:
TLD
Reason for Rejection
.id
.id is already allocated as the ISO 3166 two-letter country
code for Indonesia
all two-letter top level domain are reserved for future ISO
3166 country-code allocations
.me
all two-letter top level domain codes are reserved for
future ISO 3166 country-code allocations
.ind
.ind is the three-letter ISO 3166 country code for India,
we considered it prudent to hold this code in
reserve
.per
.per is the three-letter ISO 3166 country code for Peru, we
considered it prudent to hold this code in
reserve
2. Creation of gTLD Indicating Adult-Oriented Content
There is often the suggestion made that a dedicated gTLD indicating the
equivalent to a "red-light-zone" would be useful in
isolating and filtering adult-oriented content from minors on the
Internet. There are differing opinions on how effective this
would be. The most common suggestion is the request to create a gTLD
.xxx. Do you think that a sort of "red-light-zone"
gTLD should be created?
[strongly approve _X_] [approve __] [no opinion __] [disapprove __]
[strongly disapprove __]
If you strongly approve or approve, do you think this should be the gTLD
.xxx? [yes_X_] [no__].
If you have replied "no", what gTLD would you suggest in place of .xxx
in this category? ______
3. Other Suggestions
Please make any other suggestion concerning the names of the new gTLDs
not covered above.
I think the "red-light" district is an excellent idea. It makes it easy
for those seeking that content to find it, as well as those wishing to
avoid it to know where not to go.
There will certainly be some discussion about what should go there, but
I think it is definately a step in the right direction.
I like the idea of a "personal" domain, but the name 'nom' is a bit
obscure. I understand the reasons why the obvious ones can't be used,
and since I can't think of anything better (other than maybe 'vanity',
which is too long), I have to vote "no opinion".
_________________________________
[END]
-- Dana Chee Bellcore MCC 1A-336B (201) 829-4488 dana@bellcore.com