Hi,

 

Greg, I understand that IF we allow number-character (2 character) gTLDs (which I am strictly opposing as I think the 2 character land belongs to the ccNSO: and I hope they put a FIGHT up here) it makes sense in THEORY to also allow number-number combinations (as you have suggested in your edits). However: we would then allow to have IP addresses being URLs, right?

Say somebody applies for “.64” – and then registers the domain “64” – and adds the 3^rd and 4^th level domain “64” – the result would be the domain 64.64.64.64 – which is coincidentally also an IP address of a University in Texas.

 

I guess that could lead to minor troubles, or am I being hysteric here? We also have to be cognizant of overarching policy framework elements: Right now a gTLD has to consist of letters a-z as per 2.2.1.3.2 “String Requirements” (2012 AGB). So we would ALWAYS have to add a provision like “if the general AGB PDP string requirements would permit numbers”. Otherwise we create a loophole.


Thanks,

 

Alexander.berlin

 

 

 

 

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 8:14 AM
To: Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Changes and Comments to the WT5 Draft Supplemental Report

 

All:

 

I have added my changes and comments to the latest draft of the report (attached as a Word document).  I only got up to f.1.3, so i will have further comments after the upcoming meeting.

 

Best regards,

 

Greg

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5