Just to clarify my point about same entity principle on registrants I made during the call: Assume someone gets .muller and .müller and wants to give mark.muller and mark.müller to different people. The rule proposed would require a single registrant, but it would be easy enough to work around: simply form a legal entity that acts as the registrant and lets Mark Muller and Mark Müller have their own domains without being official registrants. Mark Müller and Mark Muller could do it by themselves if they agree, but more likely the registrar would simply offer it as a service, with a subsidiary that acts as the registrant. Or an independent company could do it. If we'd insist on matching DNS records too it could still be worked around, then you'd just have to have common hosting at least as a redirector. Thus the same entity principle would not be really effective on registrants, it would just cause extra complications and cost for people it affects. Of course this could be seen as a positive, creating new business opportunities, but on general principles I would not like to see a situation where actual users of domains are hidden behind yet another layer of obfuscation, and especially not an ICANN policy that in effect forces them to. So while I like the same entity principle for registries and registrars, I would leave it on registrant level up to the registry or registrar, possibly with a policy to be specified in the registry agreement. -- Tapani Tarvainen