Re: mTLD's Proposal for the Allocaiton of One and Two Character .mobi's via Auction
To Whom It May Concern: I was not made aware that the Public Comment forum for the .mobi proposal for "Additional Equitable Allocation Options for .MOBI One and Two-Character Domains" had already been opened (and closed). I see that the deadline was May 25, 2011, but as a former member of the mTLD Policy Advisory Board (PAB) and dotMobi Advisory Group (MAG), I would like to kindly request that an exception be made based on my previous correspondence below with Mr. Francisco Arias so that I may submit my original letter as a Public Comment to this proposed amendment. There are no relevant public comments<http://forum.icann.org/lists/mobi-rsep-2010011/>on this proposal, so I think my feedback is important. Two years ago I sent a letter to ICANN ( http://forum.icann.org/lists/allocation-framework/msg00003.html) as a PAB (Policy Advisory Board) member in support of dotMobi's proposal for the Allocation of SC SLD's specifically via the RFP framework and went even farther in my letter of support and specifically mentioned how the auction allocation method is detrimental to the extension, which is why I believe my voice needs to be heard on this matter. I would have never supported this original allocation had I known mTLD's true intentions were to simply auction these domains off. I attempted to contact Mr. Francisco Arias about this but I did not hear back. Please advise as soon as possible if I can make a public comment on this proposal for both public record and ICANN consideration. Sincerely, Andres Kello Mobility.mobi, Owner Why.mobi, Campaign Director andres@mobility.mobi On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Andres Kello <andres@mobility.mobi> wrote:
Hello Francisco,
I was not made aware that the Public Comment forum for this proposal had already been opened.
I see that the deadline was May 25, 2011, but as a former member of the mTLD Policy Advisory Board (PAB) and dotMobi Advisory Group (MAG), I would like to kindly request that an exception be made based on our previous correspondence below so that I may submit my original letter as Public Comment to this proposed amendment.
There are no relevant public comments on this proposal, so I think my feedback is important. I remind you that two years ago I sent a letter to ICANN (http://forum.icann.org/lists/allocation-framework/msg00003.html) as a PAB member in support of dotMobi's proposal for the Allocation of SC SLD's specifically via the RFP framework and went even farther in my letter of support and specifically mentioned how the auction allocation method is detrimental to the extension, which is why I believe my voice needs to be heard on this matter. I would have never supported this original allocation had I known mTLD's true intentions were to simply auction these domains off.
Please advise as soon as possible.
Regards,
Andres Kello Mobility.mobi, Owner Why.mobi, Campaign Director andres@mobility.mobi
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:15 AM, Francisco Arias < francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote:
Andres,
The public comment for the proposed amendment, once we have one, is a
separate forum. I’d suggest you to submit your comments to that forum once it is up.
Regards,
__ Francisco
On 10/25/10 3:30 PM, "Andres Kello" <andres@mobility.mobi> wrote:
Hello Francisco,
Thank you for the clarification.
With regards to my letter, will it automatically become part of the
public commentary once that is opened or do I need to resubmit it? I'm just trying to gauge how it has / or will impact this process as I am still unclear about that point.
Please let me know.
Regards,
Andres Kello Mobility.mobi, Owner Why.mobi, Campaign Director andres@mobility.mobi
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Francisco Arias <
francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote:
Hello Andres,
Once we have the proposed amendment from .MOBI it is going to be
published for public comment.
Regards,
__ Francisco
On 10/25/10 12:10 PM, "Andres Kello" <andres@mobility.mobi <
http://andres@mobility.mobi> > wrote:
Hello Francisco,
I wanted to follow up on this matter and ask you what is the current
status of this proposal, what was the impact of my letter to ICANN, and when will the public comment period be made open?
Thanks again for your continued assistance, I greatly appreciate it.
Regards,
Andres Kello Mobility.mobi, Owner Why.mobi, Campaign Director andres@mobility.mobi <http://andres@mobility.mobi>
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 2:01 AM, Francisco Arias <
francisco.arias@icann.org <http://francisco.arias@icann.org> > wrote:
Andres,
We are going to work with .MOBI on a proposed amendment that is going to
be posted for public comment in the following days.
You can see the update to the request here:
http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/#2010011
Regards,
__ Francisco
On 10/15/10 8:16 AM, "Andres Kello" <andres@mobility.mobi <http://andres
@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi> > wrote:
Hello Francisco,
Thank you for that.
What happens now?
Regards,
Andres Kello Mobility.mobi, Owner Why.mobi, Campaign Director andres@mobility.mobi <http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@
mobility.mobi>
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Francisco Arias <
francisco.arias@icann.org <http://francisco.arias@icann.org> < http://francisco.arias@icann.org> > wrote:
Andres,
Your comment is already published:
http://forum.icann.org/lists/registryservice/msg00042.html
Regards,
__ Francisco
On 10/15/10 4:38 AM, "Andres Kello" <andres@mobility.mobi <http://andres
@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@ mobility.mobi> > wrote:
Hello Francisco,
I have done as you requested and have submitted my comments to the
Registry Service e-mail address.
Please advise when my comments are up so I can view them.
Thanks,
Andres Kello Mobility.mobi, Owner Why.mobi, Campaign Director andres@mobility.mobi <http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@
mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi>
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Francisco Arias <
francisco.arias@icann.org <http://francisco.arias@icann.org> < http://francisco.arias@icann.org> <http://francisco.arias@icann.org> > wrote:
Hello Andres,
I’ve been told it would be much better if you submit your comments to <
registryservice@icann.org <http://registryservice@icann.org> < http://registryservice@icann.org> <http://registryservice@icann.org> < http://registryservice@icann.org> >, that way it will be posted to the Registries Services public forum at < http://forum.icann.org/lists/registryservice>
ICANN review period for the request ends this Friday, it would be ideal
if you submit your email before that day.
Regards,
__ Francisco
On 10/13/10 11:08 AM, "Andres Kello" <andres@mobility.mobi <
http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi> < http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi> > wrote:
Hello Francisco,
That e-mail was simply one asking Tim how to make a public comment on the
proposal, because my public comment was going to be a lot more substantive than that simple e-mail.
Having said that, feel free to publish the e-mail and reference my
previous comment as a PAB member.
Regards,
Andres Kello Mobility.mobi, Owner Why.mobi, Campaign Director andres@mobility.mobi <http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@
mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@ mobility.mobi>
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 1:32 AM, Francisco Arias <
francisco.arias@icann.org <http://francisco.arias@icann.org> < http://francisco.arias@icann.org> <http://francisco.arias@icann.org> < http://francisco.arias@icann.org> > wrote:
Hello Andres,
I have not seen your post to the public comment forum for RSEP requests.
We would like to be able to reference your email below, in order to do that we would like to publish the email in our “correspondence” public page.
Would you give us your permission to publish the email shown below in our
“correspondence” public page?
__ Francisco
From: Andres Kello <andres@mobility.mobi <http://andres@mobility.mobi>
<http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi> < http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi> >
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 04:10:00 -0700 To: Tim Cole <tim.cole@icann.org <http://tim.cole@icann.org> <
http://tim.cole@icann.org> <http://tim.cole@icann.org> <http://tim.cole@ icann.org> <http://tim.cole@icann.org> >
Subject: Re: mTLD's Proposal for the Allocaiton of One and Two Character
.mobi's via Auction
Dear Tim,
My name is Andres Kello and I am the owner of the largest forum about
.mobi domain names - Mobility.mobi <http://Mobility.mobi> - and I also sat on both the dotMobi Policy Advisory Board (PAB) and the now-defunct dotMobi Advisory Group (MAG).
Two years ago I sent a letter to ICANN <
http://forum.icann.org/lists/allocation-framework/msg00003.html> as a PAB member in support of dotMobi's proposal for the Allocation of SC SLD's specifically via the RFP framework. I went even farther in my letter of support and specifically mentioned how the auction allocation method is detrimental to the extension.
This is why I was appalled to learn yesterday that mTLD have now formally
requested < http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/mobi-request-30sep10-en.pdf> that ICANN allow them to allocate the one and two character .mobi's via Auction - a method that has been proven to fail as far as the .mobi ecosystem is concerned and as evidenced by the poor end-user uptake and development of past Premium .mobi domain names allocated via auctions.
As such, I would like to formally voice my strong objections to this
latest request by mTLD and wanted to ask you how I can go about doing that, particularly considering that mTLD saw "no need to consult directly with other constituency groups" as per their request form, which I also found quite alarming.
I appreciate your assistance with this matter.
Kind regards,
Andres Kello Mobility.mobi, Owner Why.mobi, Campaign Director andres@mobility.mobi <http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@
mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi> <http://andres@ mobility.mobi> <http://andres@mobility.mobi>
participants (1)
-
Andres Kello