RE: [ga-roots] ICANN Policy -- revised version

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: owner-ga-roots@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga-roots@dnso.org]On Behalf
|> Of L Gallegos
|> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 4:15 AM
|> To: ga-roots@dnso.org
|> Subject: RE: [ga-roots] ICANN Policy -- revised version
|>
|> On 21 Jun 2001, at 22:19, Dassa wrote:
|>
|> >
|> > |> On 2001-06-17 03:35:12 -0400, L Gallegos wrote:
|> > |>
|> > |> >Dassa, do you have any idea how many roots and TLDs there are |>
|> > >right now?  Do you know how many online registration systems are |>
|> > >in place and how many of the TLDs are represented in them? There |>
|> > >will be a rush?  The rush is on - big time.
|> >
|> > Actually I do, and I am also aware that a large number of TLD's in
|> > other name spaces to the legacy root have no to very few 2LD's under
|> > them. However, my reference to a rush was related to the TLD's
|> > themselves.  It is not difficult to set up a root server and to
|> > establish a TLD.  No more difficult than setting up a few name
|> > servers.  If there was the possibility of having a TLD recognised by
|> > ICANN with little effort, I'm sure a large number of people would jump
|> > at the chance.  The biggest difficulty in establishing a TLD in any
|> > name space is to get the clients.
|>
|> So small is illegitimate?  I guess some of the ccTLDs should be
|> kicked off the net then?  Certainly they should not be in the USG
|> root if they have only a few SLDs, right?  I guess it's just fine to
|> duplicate the smaller ones since only a few SLDs would collide.  It
|> would be only a small problem, so why even bother to with it?  <snip>

No, small or big has nor bearing except in the potential for damage.  But
in a practical sense, it makes a big difference.  I raise the point that
size doesn't matter, you concur.  Then there is the differences between
being available directly from the Internet or those TLD's that are behind
private networks.  That is also a consideration.  Should we only consider
TLD's that are visible on the Internet or should we also consider TLD's
that have abided by the guidelines and are only visible on the private
networks.  It is all a matter of drawing lines.  Currently the line is
drawn at TLD's that are accepted into the legacy root name space.  You wish
to expand that to include your own TLD's.  The arguments you put forward
apply to much more than the TLD's you support.  If we accept your
arguments, we must accept the arguments of the other claims that will
follow.

Once the cat is out of the bag you will have a hard time putting it back.

What is the solution?

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch

PS...I can have thousands of TLD's on the Internet within hours and have
them more populated than your .biz within a month.  That is not a boast.
But a fact of life.  I have access to a market that this a 99% guarantee. I
also have the team and infrastructure to put it together.  That does not it
make it right however.

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html