> At 05:51 PM 1/16/98 +0000, Jim Dixon wrote:
> >> 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.
>
> NSI gets to control the data base AND be a registrar? Interesting conflict
> of interest this establishes. I can't imagine how anyone would think that
> this is bad for NSI (or good for anyone else.)
My interpretation of the somewhat ambiguous original was that com/net/org
were to be shared by NSI and the CORE registrars; since CORE has the
software necessary for running a shared registry and NSI doesn't, I assumed
that Maganziner's proposal was that com/net/org would be moved over to the
CORE shared database.
I understood the package to be:
* delegation of the seven gTLDs is to be postponed indefinitely
* the CORE registrars are to be allowed to register names in
com/net/org ASAP on a par with NSI
* CORE takes over the shared database
* NSI gets exclusive control of .us (or .usa?) for a period of
time
This would be a brilliant solution: it postpones consideration of the
fractious Internet governance questions; it breaks the NSI monopoly;
it gives CORE a clear and not too controversial role; and it turns
NSI's energies towards straightening out the .US domain, giving them
a strong incentive to do so.
If this is not the proposal, what is? Perhaps Mr Semich can elucidate.
-- 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