nanog mailing list archives
Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs)
From: Jean-François Mezei <jfmezei () vaxination ca>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:11:46 -0400
While doing the groceries, I got to think about this issue. There have been complaints in the past about difficulty in getting new legitimate TLDs approved by ICANN. (image of ICANN being too USA centric etc etc etc). So I understand a move towards a more documented and "logical" process to get new .TLDs approved adn setup. Right now, whethere real or not, there is an image that the .TLDs have been vetted and are operated by reputable people and used for legitimate purposes. (yeah, that image might be tarnished in some circles). But my uneducated opinion is that this current project appears to let the .TLD loose and this will result in top level domains being meaningless, without any trust. There should have been an evolution from a tightly controlled small set of TLDs towards alowly growing set of TLDs done fairly and openly. Going whole hog on auctioning anything and everything is a bit too much fo a revolution in my opinion. The way I see it from quick read, by default you can get anything registered as a .TLD unless someone else justifies why you shouldn't get it, or if it is truly obscene. There should have be a "in between" where people still have to justify a new .TLD and only allow TLDs that are generic and allow many different entities to participate. (as opposed to using a private trademark as a .TLD where only one company can participate).
Current thread:
- RE: the business model, was what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens, (continued)
- RE: the business model, was what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens Frank Bulk - iNAME (Jun 28)
- RE: the business model, was what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens John Levine (Jun 28)
- Re: the business model, was what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens Roland Perry (Jun 28)
- Re: the business model, was what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens Jean-François Mezei (Jun 28)
- Re: the business model, was what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens Stephane Bortzmeyer (Jun 29)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Roland Perry (Jun 28)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Jay R. Ashworth (Jun 30)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Eric Brunner-Williams (Jun 29)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 27)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Jean-François Mezei (Jun 27)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) David Conrad (Jun 28)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Scott Francis (Jun 27)
- RE: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of new TLDs) Matthew Huff (Jun 27)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Jay R. Ashworth (Jun 27)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) David Conrad (Jun 27)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Scott Francis (Jun 27)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs) David Conrad (Jun 27)