<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: Thick vs.thin (was: [ga] Casting stones)
Leah - you talk about what could be and what should be, I was merely
making observations based on what is.
(Is that five for me today?)
-rwr
"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright
Please review our ICANN Reform Proposal:
http://www.byte.org/heathrow
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf
> Of L. Gallegos
> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 12:21 PM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: Thick vs.thin (was: [ga] Casting stones)
>
>
>
>
> On 8 Aug 2002, at 10:11, Don Brown wrote:
>
> > Competition, innovation, progress, no monopoly and lower
> registration
> > costs for consumers, to name a few . . .
>
> If there were thousands of TLDs, or even hundreds, the monopoly issue
> would be put to rest. The market would take care of pricing. In the
> case of VRSG, it is an issue simply because it was the only game in
> town for so long that every commercial enterprise was forced
> to register
> in that registry, providing a scenario where it was easy to gauge
> consumers. Adding "registrars" to the mix forced price
> reductions, yes.
> However, it is still a monopoly in the sense that VRSG still
> fixes the
> registry fee.
>
> Had there been a hundred gTLDs added early on, consumers would
> have been registering in many regsitries and NSI would have had to
> compete in a fair market. Every registry is a monoply, but
> that is no
> different from every insurance company being a monopoly. If
> you don't
> like the practices, terms and conditions or policies of one company,
> choose another.
>
> A great many of the issues driving people crazy today could go away
> with hundreds of TLDs being made available in the USG root. I doubt
> we will see it because the IP interests will do all they can
> to prevent it.
>
> There is nothing wrong with having a single registrar for a
> regsitry if there
> are many registries - small, large and in-between. As with
> the problems
> surrounding ICANN's elimination of the at-large, the
> artificial scarcity of
> TLDs prevents the public's having a choice in the most basic areas of
> the internet - the DNS.
>
> All the talk of confusion raised by having a multitude of
> TLDs is also
> pure FUD. People have become accustomed to changing area codes
> constantly, as well as having to use more digits in phone
> numbers, dial
> around codes, etc. The public would become accustomed to a variety
> of TLD extensions in the same manner and more companies would
> spring up to index them.
>
> Registries could succeed or fail. People and companies would then
> have to make changes just as they do when they move and change
> phone numbers or an area code is changed forcing companies and
> individuals to adjust. It's a pain, but we all do it. A
> worse scenario
> would be to not allow new area codes and have an artificial
> scarcity of
> phone numbers. I see no difference with the lack of TLDs in the USG
> root, especially when there are thousands of TLDs already in
> existence,
> many of which actively accept registrations. It's no longer an
> experiment in the sense that it can be done. It's been done.
> So what is
> ICANN's excuse?
>
> Leah
>
> >
> > Thursday, August 8, 2002, 8:35:21 AM, J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin
> > <jefsey@club-internet.fr> wrote: JFCJM> yes. but what is
> the need for
> > a registrar (as understood today)? JFCJM> jfc
> >
> > JFCJM> On 13:05 08/08/02, Ross Wm. Rader said:
> > >>Any number of them. The very existence of registrars in this
> > >>namespace is, in itself, an innovation. The myriad of business
> > >>models they employ represent an innovation, the
> technology that they
> > >>use, in many cases, represent an innovation...the list
> does go one,
> > >>but the specifics are well-documented and not really
> important to this discussion.
> > >> -rwr
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----
> > Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.
> > donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net http://www.inetconcepts.net
> > PGP Key ID: 04C99A55 (972) 788-2364 Fax:
> (972) 788-5049
> > Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
> > ----
> >
> > --
> > 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
>
--
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
>>>
|