[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do

To: wg-c@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 09:22:04 -0700
In-Reply-To: <37C56412.653366DD@syr.edu>; from Milton Mueller on Thu, Aug 26, 1999 at 11:58:10AM -0400
Mail-Followup-To: wg-c@dnso.org
References: <s7c52537.041@gw1.rspab.com> <37C56412.653366DD@syr.edu>
Sender: owner-wg-c@dnso.org

On Thu, Aug 26, 1999 at 11:58:10AM -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
[...]
> Now, what does this have to do with *new* gTLDs?

You said earlier in this same message:

> The registry is and always will be a monopoly.

This is an important insight; and it will be true for all new gTLDs.  
The fact that they will be monopolies has a definite bearing on 
policy issues concerning their introduction.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain

References:
- RE: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
  - From: "Kevin J. Connolly" <CONNOLLK@rspab.com>
- Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
  - From: Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>
- Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
  - From: Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
Next by Date: Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
Prev by thread: Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
Next by thread: Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread