Jim and all,
Jim Dixon wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jan 1998, John Charles Broomfield wrote:
>
> > > > 1. Magaziner will recommend the seven new TLDs be put on hold
> > > > indefinitely.
> > >
> > > This would be a very positive development. The practice of collecting
> > > payments for preregistering names in the new TLDs has created a
> > > situation with some very unpleasant possibilities; this would solve
> > > that problem in a stroke.
> >
> > Positive? (Ie not entering the 7 into the IANA root) Once the CORE shared
> > registry goes online and they have their servers running, the fact that the
> > registrars are charging for registering names into that database would make
> > the *operation* EQUAL (as far as collecting cash from customers to then
> > register domains under TLDs. Do *NOT* interpret my words to mean this equal
>
> CORE registrars are collecting money for preregistering names in domains
> which have not been delegated and will probably not be delegated for
> months, if ever.
I agree, but I do believe that those that have pre-registred in CORE's 7
perposed
gTLD's should be made whole.
>
>
> Some CORE registrars are charging money for preregistrations which they
> say will be among the first 2000 places in the queue. Since there are
> nearly 100 registrars, what they are doing is running a lottery.
Agreed, and this practice must be brought to a halt.
>
>
> Is either practice legal in your jurisdiction?
>
> > in any other sense.) to all the other wannabe registries who charge for name
> > registrations. Presumably you therefore think that it would also be very
> > positive to put your pet scheme (.eu, .eur, .euro, can't remember which) on
> > hold indefinitely too then? (though I think in your case it already is).
>
> The European Commission has indeed asked that .EU, .EUR, and .EURO be
> delegated. No one is suggesting that any names will be registered,
> let alone any fees charged, until the delegation is complete.
>
> > So you think it is positive to put ALL new TLDs on hold indefinitely...
> > (for some people indefinitely means forever, for others it just means no
> > fixed date).
>
> No. I think that charging fees for preregistrations has been a very
> serious error. Postponing the delegation of the seven gTLDs indefinitely
> will solve a problem: it will force those who have taken this money to
> give it back and it will also eliminate the "land rush" scenario.
I agree in the extream! In fact pre-registration should not be allowed
in any form.
>
>
> I would be just as happy to see seven alternative names delegated,
> provided that charging for preregistrations were prohibited.
>
> > > > 2. The .com, .net and .org TLDs will be opened up for competitive
> > > > Registrars to manage, including NSI/WorldNIC as well as the CORE members
> > > > and database manager.
> > >
> > > This would also be wonderful for all concerned - except perhaps
> > > NSI - especially if the requirements for becoming a CORE registrar
> > > were relaxed.
> >
> > CORE is not a registrar, but manages registries.
>
> Who suggested CORE is a registrar?
I have for one. And, Jim you have intimated this in the past yourself.
>
>
> > If .com, .net, and .org are
> > opened up for competition, then you will need *some* organisation to handle
> > the actual registry. CORE members would probably not join the scheme as
> > "CORE members" but as individual registrars (much like some do today when
> > signing on as premium or premiere partners with NSI).
>
> If the CORE registrars were to share com/net/org with NSI, then there
> would have to be a shared registry. That is exactly what CORE is.
> If the plan is to open up com/net/org to the CORE registrars, the only
> sensible way to do it is to have CORE run the shared database.
That shared database and shared-Roots should be avalible to any and all
registrars, weather part of CORE or not.
>
>
> This would eliminate the NSI monopoly: a good thing. It would give the
> CORE registrars a return on their investment: a good thing. Most
> importantly, it would set aside all of the contentious questions about
> who should delegate and control new gTLDs.
Control of any gTLD's should not be a question. There should be no
registrar having any compleate control of any gTLD if shared gTLD's
is to be a reality. This should also be true of any and all ROOT servers
and Databases.
>
>
> People tend to forget that there are at least two major questions here:
>
> * how to manage the domain name space
I believe that this question is really already answered. (See my last two
postings and above as well).
>
>
> * how to break NSI's monopoly over the existing gTLDs
With all registries sharring gTLD's, Roots, and the Doamin name database along
with NSI and CORE this should eliminate andy monopoly over existing gTLD's or
any additional new gTLD's that may be added later.
>
>
> This decision would cut the Gordian knot. We don't need to answer the
> first question in order to answer the second. Handing com/net/org over
> to CORE and postponing all the thorny decisions about new gTLDs is a
> damn good idea.
I am not for handing over anything to CORE in it's present form, rather allowing
them to share registration under those gTLD's along with non-CORe registries.
>
>
> --
> Jim Dixon Managing Director
> VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Member of Council President
> Internet Services Providers Association EuroISPA EEIG
> http://www.ispa.org.uk http://www.euroispa.org
> tel +44 171 976 0679 tel +32 2 503 22 65
Regards,
-- Jeffrey A. Williams DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
--------------BB7B50898A005010518E641B Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Jeff Williams Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
begin: vcard fn: Jeff Williams n: Williams;Jeff org: IEG. INC. email;internet: jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com title: Director Inter/extra/intranet and Java and CORBA development note: "One who knows others is wise. One who knows oneself ins enlightned. x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: FALSE version: 2.1 end: vcard
--------------BB7B50898A005010518E641B--