>As Ted highlighted, John has thrown up a straw man that nobody would >ever reasonably propose (the IESG being consulted on every name), where >that has nothing to do with 6761 or any other existing or contemplated >process. > >Can we please at least stay within the realm of reality? Well, OK. If the plan isn't that we get to look at every name in the next round, what names do we get to look at? It doesn't seem likely that we can prepare a complete set of names with substantial informal use or other technical problems. Some of the problems depend on context. For example, there is a lot of old CPE that leaks queries for .BELKIN. But maybe if a TLD application were from the same company that made the leaky devices, that would be OK. R's, John