Domain Name Supporting Organization

Working Group C

Review the Creation of new generic Top Level Domains for the Internet Domain Name System

(Proposal for the Names Council)

1.- Charter

2.- Calendar

3.- Applicants 


1.- Charter

Working Group C (WG C) is requested to develop a document -showing the consensus of the different groups involved- responding to the following questions:

  1. Should there be new generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs)? If yes: How many? Which? At which speed should they be deployed and in which order? What should be the mechanism for developing new gTLDs after all these are deployed. Should each new gTLD have a specific charter?

  2. What should the registration and data maintenance process and regulation be?.

  3. How should the new gTLDs be managed? What should the registry(ies) be like? Is it mandatory to have a new registry(ies)? Why? Does the structure proposed comply with worldwide concepts of anti-trust law? What information should be made public by the registry(ies) and how? Obligations of the registry(ies).

For these three issues, the WG should deliver three documents:

  1. A first document in which the WG expresses and justifies the answers to the questions expressed in the first point above.

  2. The second document (necessary only if the creation of new gTLDs is considered in the first part) which could take the form of a proposal for a "Call for Tenders for a gTLD registry (or several)" that the NC would recommend ICANN to issue.

  3. The third document should be registration and data maintenance procedure for the new registry(ies).


  • Membership in WG C should comprise experts from a broad range of legal, operational, technical, business and user defense interests. In particular, it should include members from all seven Constituencies of the Domain Name Supporting Organization.
  • The WG should include members of the legal profession who specialize on Intellectual Property issues and anti-trust law. Technical members should be able assess the technical impact of adding new gTLDs to the present Domain Name System.
  • Participation from all geographical regions (defined by the ICANN bylaws , Section 6, Article V) is encouraged.


  • The WG will be structured in two or three drafting groups who will be requested to come out with one or two of the deliverables the WG should produce.
  • Each drafting group will hold its own teleconferences to work on their draft(s), and might have its own mailing lists. WG mailing lists and teleconferences will be treated in the same open way as the WG’s mailing list and teleconferences.


  • A mailing list for the WG will be created. The mailing list will be publicly archived at the <> website.
  • A webpage that will include documents presented will be open. All reference documents presented to the WG will be posted there.
  • At any time, anybody who has been reading the public list or the documents, may write to the address with suggestions and comments for the WG (e-mail sent directly to WG members will be considered as not received, to avoid flooding).
  • Members of the WG may choose to read the comments page whenever they feel or to subscribe to and receive all comments in their mailbox.
  • (All this will allow participation of anybody else who wishes to do it, without forcing the members of the WG to receive e-mail from several dozen people if they do not wish to)
  • Teleconferences could be webcasted if somebody is interested enough to pay the cost of such transmission. Minutes will be public.


2.- Calendar

June 25th, 1999

Creation of Working Group C

August 9th, 1999

Presentation of WG C report. First three-week comment period opens.

August 23rd and 24th, 1999 (Santiago, Chile)

Meetings of Constituencies. Public meeting of the Names Council and General Assembly of the DNSO. Public discussion of the WG C issues.

August 30th, 1999

Closing of first comment period. WG C starts reconsidering its recommendations based on comments received from the General Assembly, the Names Council and any other parties.

September 13th, 1999

New report produced by WG C. Report on changes from the first version.

Second three-week comment period opens.

October 4th, 1999

Closing of second public comment period.

October 14th, 1999

Names Council meeting to decide on new gTLDs report.

October 18th , 1999

Report on new gTLDs sent to the ICANN Board.

Other actions:

After the ICANN meeting of the Board in Los Angeles, the WG will either be asked to do further work or will be disbanded if the Names Council and the ICANN Board consider that their work is finished.


3.- Applicants

ccTLDs (4)

  • Dennis Jennings (Ireland)
  • Elisabeth Porteneuve (France)
  • Kilnam Chon (Korea)
  • Daiva Tamulioniene (Lithuania)
  • Bill Semich (US)

Registrars (5)

  • Ken Stubbs - CORE (SU)
  • Hal Lubsen - DomainBank/Altronics (?)
  • Amadeu Abril i Abril - Nominalia (Spain)
  • Michael D. Palage (US)
  • Ivan Pope (UK)

Business (5)

  • Javier Sola - EuroInternet (Spain)
  • Jon Englund - ITAA (US)
  • Roger Cochetti - IBM (US)
  • John Lewis/Tony Holmes - BT (UK)
  • Marilyn Cade AT&T - (US)

Non_Commercial (3)

  • Milton Mueller - ACM (US)
  • David Maher - POC (US)
  • Jean-Michel Bécar - ETSI (France)

ISP (3)

  • Michael Schneider - EuroIspa (Germany)
  • Barbara Dooley - CIX (US)
  • Tolga Yulderi (Canada)

IP  (2)

  • Petter Rindforth, LLM - INTA (Sweden)
  • Tod Cohen - MPA - (US)

gTLD (0)


General Assembly (8):

  • Christopher Ambler (US)
  • Rod Dixon (US)
  • Chris Conant (US)

I am a religion consultant based out of Los Angeles.

  • Kent Crispin
  • Glenn Kowack
  • Stephen W. Snively

I am a 50 year old commercial real estate lawyer with Holland & Knight LLP in Orlando, Florida. My qualifications include a strong interest in the developing Internet and a creative mind.

  • John Weinberg

I would like to participate in Working Group C. I am a law professor at Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan, USA, and a past chair of the American Association of Law Schools Mass Communications Law section. I have served as a legal scholar in residence at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission; a professor in residence at the U.S. Justice Department; a visiting scholar at the University of Tokyo's Institute of Socio-Information and Communications Studies; a law clerk for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall and then-Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg; and an associate at the law firm of Shea & Gardner. I graduated from Harvard College and Columbia Law School. In 1997 and early 1998, I advised the United States government in its formulation of policy concerning Internet governance and the domain name system. I have recently served as a consultant to the U.S. Federal Communications Commission on other matters. I have continued to participate in domain-name debates; you can see the comments I submitted earlier this year to WIPO and ICANN at <>.

  • Rita M. Odin

I am an IP attorney at Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, PLLC and have been practicing for several years. Prior to joining Arent Fox in February, I was a trademark examining attorney at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Since joining Arent Fox I've spent a considerable amount of time working on domain name issues including analyzing the structure and development of first level domains. I am very interested in being a part of Working Group C.