Re: NSI SAYS FCC SHOULD ASSUME INTERNET REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS

[Hank Nussbacher <hank () ibm net il>]

On Tue, 22 Apr 1997, Jordan Mendelson wrote:

 [once again, for all those people who want to stop reading about iahc,
 nsi, internic, iana, or anything that deals with alternate registrations,
 hit 'd' now]

> It took THIS long to get InterNIC to where they are today, and now we want
> to shove in 28 new ones? And each one of these 28 new ones is going to try
> and add domains to each of the 7 new tlds? We are going to start seeing
> legal hassles like nothing else. "I sent in my registration for my.firm at
> 3:32 PST to yyy registrations. Well, I sent mine in at 7:15 EST for it to
> zzz registrations, but they processed mine first, so I get it".
>
> Personally, I think that the new TLD's are good, though I would personally
> cut out ones such as .nom because that is just going to cause legal
> problems about who owns smith.nom, etc, but I don't think new registrars
> should be added. InterNIC should be it, one company providing this sort of
> thing is a hell of a lot more powerful than 20 little ones.

The same could be said when AT&T was one company.  We are not discussing
breaking up NSI but rather adding competition - in the same way MCI and
Sprint have added alternatives for people in North America.  Yes, all 28
will not survive.  But even if 3-4 others do come out and provide users
with registration options other than NSI, we will have done our job.

I live in a country with a monopoly Telco.  If I do not like their service
or their options, I have no where to turn.  There is no ATM locally and
the cost of a T1 line to the USA is $1m/yr.  Competition provides
alternatives as well as lower costs.

> --
> Jordan Mendelson     : www.wserv.com/~jordy/
> Web Services, Inc.   : www.wserv.com

Hank Nussbacher
IAHC member
[the views expressed above belong to the author and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the other IAHC members]


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -