nanog mailing list archives
Re: .nyc - here we go...
From: Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:21:15 -0700
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk () gmail com> wrote:
Summary: there are residual risks, but the checks and balances of the process are likely to stop bad actors, at the cost of also stopping some good actors. Error in the side of caution preferred.
You're missing the forest.... If a new gTLD applicant decides to "capitalize" on their financial investment once they have received approval, there is nothing stopping them from opening the flood gates to anyone who wants to register sub-domains/second-level domains for financial gain. Of course, they should be allowed to do so. It's a free market. Just look at .cc and the complete Charlie Foxtrot they caused by allowing second-level domains to be used by anyone for any purpose (e.g. *.co.cc, *.cu.cc, etc.) and .tk for instance. We can expect a lot more of the same with the expansion of the TLD space, so it *will* require a lot more diligence. - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson fergdawgster(at)gmail.com
Current thread:
- Re: .nyc - here we go..., (continued)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Mark Andrews (Jul 04)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Mike Jones (Jul 05)
- Message not available
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Larry Sheldon (Jul 04)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Eric Brunner-Williams (Jul 04)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Eric Brunner-Williams (Jul 04)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Matthew Kaufman (Jul 04)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Mark Andrews (Jul 04)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... John Levine (Jul 04)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Rubens Kuhl (Jul 02)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Paul Ferguson (Jul 02)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Rubens Kuhl (Jul 02)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Paul Ferguson (Jul 02)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Rubens Kuhl (Jul 02)
- Re: .nyc - here we go... Paul Ferguson (Jul 02)