ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] gTLD Constituency


Leah and all remaining assembly members,

JandL wrote:

> There is a technical collision in the name space.

  Well let's say it could be.  It isn't yet.

>
>
> Even though it is quite possible to have the same TLD in different
> roots, there will be a nightmare for hosting companies who will have
> no idea which is which, whether they already have a zone set up
> for an identical domain name...

  THere are other ways to prevent a collision.  ONe of which you have
perported, FCFS.  However this is if there is only one "True Root".
With multiple Root structure it is also possible to prevent collisions IF
at registration time that each root structure is checked prior to allowing
the registration for ????.BIZ .   With our "Shared Root" structure,
sometimes known as SROOTS, the same requirement applies as
with Multiple roots, except that each separate root structure is "Known"
to that other.

>
>
> It also fragments the net irrevocably because you will then HAVE
> TO choose one root over another and keep switching to see each
> version of .BIZ.  Now it doesn't matter which root you point to.
> They all carry the USG root TLDs as well as their additional non-
> colliding TLDs.  If DoC enters a dupe, then there is no way to do
> this any more.  Roots will then have to choose which .BIZ to carry.
> The name space is fractured, period.
>
> In addition, how will it be determined who's domain name is the
> legitimate one?  (hint:  both).  So how do businesses market their
> sites/names?  Will the roots always carry the same version of the
> TLD?
>
> DoC will introduce not only a collider, but will be instrumental in
> wreaking havoc on the ISP industry as well as the TLD industry - all
> because ICANN has decided these TLDs don't matter and the only
> root is the DoC root.  The precedent is set.  The US government
> can just take your business product if it chooses to not
> acknowledge you.  Great.  This is maintaining the stability of the
> net?
>
> Leah
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
> > > jp@ADNS.NET
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 2:00 PM
> > > To: ga@dnso.org
> > > Subject: Re: [ga] gTLD Constituenc>
> > > .BIZ belongs to Leah Gallagos and AtlanticRoot - Reassignment by DoC
> > > is a violation of the APA and a violation of the 5th Amendment
> > > Takings Clause.
> >
> > While we're on this topic, can anyone define what seems to be the
> > popular term "collision" when referring to .biz and the presence of
> > two .biz's on the Internet?  Is there a technical collision that will
> > actually occur if we have two .biz's?  Or can both reside, each listed
> > in different roots, without affecting the other?  If that's the case,
> > then it seems to me that what we have here is more a marketing
> > collision than a technical one. Anyone?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jeff
> > --
> > jeff field
> > 925-283-4083
> > jfield@aaaq.com
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


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



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>