<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">> <span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: verdana, sans-serif; line-height: 16px; ">Although not mentioned, .edu falls into roughly the same category.</span><div><font color="#333333" face="verdana, sans-serif"><span style="line-height: 16px;"><br></span></font></div><div><font color="#333333" face="verdana, sans-serif"><span style="line-height: 16px;">Well, very roughly. Over the years, .edu has 'wobbled' between a strictly US University Domain and something else (ill defined) including lower levels of education in the US and an international dimension.</span></font></div><div><font color="#333333" face="verdana, sans-serif"><span style="line-height: 16px;">Before CWG goes further, someone should ask the Registry (¿Educause?) for a list of the current Registrants.</span></font></div><div><br></div><div>My personal expectation would be that we shall finish up classifying .edu as a normal gTLD with a registration policy. However, it is NOT an 'open' gTLD. In the era of on-line courses, what is 'education' needs to be clearly and narrowly defined. Meanwhile, many countries use an .sld in their ccTLD for their Universities. e.g. <<a href="http://www.soas.ac.uk/">http://www.soas.ac.uk/</a>></div><div><br></div><div>Regards</div><div><br></div><div>CW</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div><div>On 14 May 2015, at 21:49, Greg Shatan <<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">In yesterday's Congressional hearings, the issue of .mil and .gov was brought up, due at least in part to the Defending Internet Freedom Act <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5737">https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5737</a>, and an opinion piece in US News & World Report. <a href="http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2015/05/13/congress-should-ask-tough-questions-about-icann-domain-name-transition">http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2015/05/13/congress-should-ask-tough-questions-about-icann-domain-name-transition</a></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">The Defending Internet Freedom Act says (from the summary):</div><ul style="margin:0px 0px 1.5em;padding:0px 0px 0px 40px;color:rgb(51,51,51);line-height:15.996000289917px"><li><font face="verdana, sans-serif">the U.S. government will be granted ownership of the ".gov" and ".mil" top-level domains and specified servers will be maintained in the United States;</font></li></ul><div><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height:15.996000289917px"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">A couple of the Representatives raised concerns that .gov and .mil​ would be vulnerable to a transfer away from the USG, and asked the witnesses if ownership (or perpetual control) of .gov and .mil by the US should be ensured in the transition. Several panelists answered in the affirmative and I don't believe any opposed.</font></div></span></font></div><div><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height:15.996000289917px"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br></font></div></span></font></div><div><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height:15.996000289917px"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">We have not really discussed this issue. I think it behooves us to deal with it. Given the historical and current use of these two domains< I would not expect too much controversy.</font></div></span></font></div><div><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height:15.996000289917px"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br></font></div></span></font></div><div><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height:15.996000289917px"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Although not mentioned, .edu falls into roughly the same category. We should consider if we should accord it similar treatment.</font></div></span></font></div><div><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height:15.996000289917px"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br></font></div></span></font></div><div><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height:15.996000289917px"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Greg</font></div></span></font></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br><a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<br></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>