I believe RIPE has a position on these issues and it should be communicated to IANA.
Indeed we have, and it is hardly reflected in the draft. The case for more TLDs is largely based on vague and unattributed generalisations of the "there is a perceived need..." and "it is considered undesirable..." variety. More ominously, we are told that "market forces dictate...". If "the market" is to govern the Internet, and dictatorship is its avowed form of governance, then it is pointless to circulate drafts, let alone comment on them. The draft selects some arguments against its case, but these are largely straw men. Also, there is no consideration of alternatives to the .com problem (let's face it, that's what this is all about), such as its proper use and the use of country TLDs. Whatever about the predominance of "market forces", I hope that RIPE can, in commenting on this draft, convey the strong and very constructive views of its members, particularly as expressed at January's meeting (RIPE-23). Regards. Mike Norris