nanog mailing list archives
Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs
From: Mark Andrews <marka () isc org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:46:29 +1000
In message <5A6D953473350C4B9995546AFE9939EE0D633D5A () RWC-EX1 corp seven com>, G eorge Bonser writes:
The failure rate isn't going to be high enough for natural selection to take effect. Remember the protocols we use were designed to work back when there was only a single flat namespace. Simple hostnames will appear to work fine for 99.999% of people. It's just when you get namespace collisions that there will be problems.I would guess that most of these are going to be purchased simply to prevent someone else from getting them
I would agree with this part.
and that most of them will never actually be placed into production.
But not with this part.
So it will basically just be a cash cow for ICANN while people pay their $185K/pop "application fee" to snap up a piece of real estate they don't want anyone else to have.
Adding gtlds and opening up the root to brands effectively requires TM holders to register/bid to protect their TM rights. Now $10 or so is not a lot for a TM.gtld and isn't worth the court costs but $185K/pop is a lot and sooner or later a TM holder will sue ICANN because they don't want to have to pay $185K to protect their TM and it will be interesting to see the results. It will be even more interesting if ICANN looses and has to roll back brand delegations it has made. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka () isc org
Current thread:
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs, (continued)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Doug Barton (Jun 19)
- future revenue at risk vs near term cost ratio Mike Leber (Jun 19)
- Re: future revenue at risk vs near term cost ratio Doug Barton (Jun 20)
- Message not available
- Re: future revenue at risk vs near term cost ratio Tim Chown (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Tony Finch (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Tony Finch (Jun 21)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- RE: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs George Bonser (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Robert Bonomi (Jun 20)
- RE: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs George Bonser (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John R. Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Owen DeLong (Jun 20)