>On Tue, Feb 24, 1998 at 09:08:00AM +0000, Jim Dixon wrote:
>[...]
>
>> The only thing that I recall having said about "smaller" gTLDs is
>>
>> * monopoly gTLDs are probably acceptable where the number of
>> probably registrants is too small to make running a shared
>> registry economically viable
>
>The CORE SRS is designed to handle any number of TLDs; the incremental
>cost of adding a TLD is zero; the incremental cost of running a
>registry for a very lightly used TLD is zero. Therefore, there is no
>such case as you describe -- for *any* new TLD, regardless of the number
>of probable registrants, it will be cheaper to run it in the SRS than it
>would be to create a tiny new monopoly registry.
This is exactly where the value of a CORE type system comes into its own.
With the GP or monopoly TLDs, each TLD has to cover the cost of building a
system, interfacing with the world, implementing it and getting a return on
the investment. Not only is this very inefficient, but its the end user who
pays for it all.
The beauty of a CORE type system is that every extra TLD makes the system
more efficient. This is an added benefit for minority and non-profit gTLDs
which may never do enough business to run their own high level registry.
Ivan
Ivan Pope ivan@netnames.co.uk
NETNAMES * The INTERNATIONAL DOMAIN NAME REGISTRY
Global Domain Name Registrar - gTLD Registrar
http://www.netnames.com - http://www.gtld.com
UK Freephone 0800 269049
180-182 Tottenham Court Road London W1P 9LE UK
+44 171 291 3900 +44 171 291 3939 Fax
Faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death.
Hunter S. Thompson
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:25 PST