** Reply to note from Bret Fausett <bfausett@internet.law.pro> Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:28:17 -0800

I've been an advocate of new gTLDs for over ten years now, and time and again I have seen the process delayed by studies and the need for further preparation. The truth is that we cannot foresee with 100% certainty all of the consequences of this, or any, change in the fabric of the Internet. We will always have something to study and something new on which to ponder and prepare. The last five years have seen a concerted effort on behalf of the GNSO, ICANN Staff, and the ICANN community at large to move this process forward, finally, and we now have a very thoughtful, if not always perfect, set of guidelines prepared by ICANN Staff. As a much smarter man once observed, "the perfect is the enemy of the good." We cannot wait for perfection or we will never go anywhere at all. These guidelines are going through yet another revision now, and we almost certainly still have the opportunity to provide meaningful input into the process and impact the final version.

While I can understand the desire to make the RFP and implementation guidelines the best they can be, I don't support the call for further delay. Let me comment briefly on the reasons advanced as supporting a delay of the process (copied from Beau's recent email):

You are correct in your points. There is a difference between reviewing issues for valid reasons and reviewing to delay. I "have no dog in this fight." As you know, I do not work for registrars or registries. If I am to be accused of any bias it is solely to make sure that whois data is accurate and that is enforced -- so that it is easier to track down spammers and other bad actors. I don't believe you give mroe responsibility to a person who is not doing their job. ICANN either does not have the will or the skill handle their current areas of responsibility. ------------------------------------------------------ Who is General Error and why is he reading my drive?