ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


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

Re: Fwd: Re: [ga] FW: Comment from the gTLD Registry Constituency


Eric and all assembly members,

  Interesting view here Eric.  But I got to say you got a very good
point here!  Nice thinking!

  I would also have to add, as far as DNS is concerned a TLD is a TLD,
is a TLD...  What is commonly called a ccTLD is one that denotes
a country code, .COM does not.  Yet .COM is exclusively now
a US based TLD/gTLD, by contract from ICANN and approved
by the DOC/NTIA in exchange for redeligating .ORG and .NET,
along with some cash from Verisign to exclusively have .COM.

eric@hi-tek.com wrote:

> Dear Leah,
>
> I think we should peel one more layer off the Onion.
>
> dotCom should be looked at as a ccTLD controlled by the USG.
> We are looking at these TLDs backwards.  If it is controlled by a country, which
> dotCOM clearly is then it is a ccTLD.  If it is not and is open and inclusive
> then it should be a gTLD based upon free enterprise and the market.  Some domains
> under some TLDs should be worth 500$ USD and some should be worth 2 cents.
>
> Yes ICANN should only worry about functionality and not market or control.
>
> At least it is another way to look at it.
> eric
>
> Leah Gallegos wrote:
>
> > Karen and Don:
> >
> > In reality, IMO, the bottom line is that ICANN should have little or nothing
> > to do with dictating how a registry should operate, nor should it have
> > anything to do with pricing or consumer protection.  The only area where
> > ICANN should be involved is determination of whether the registry can operate
> > technically to provide the required service to the community.
> >
> > As in any other business, the consumer will decide whether he wants to do
> > business wth a particular company.  If they get
> > good service for reasonable prices, they will come back.  If not, they will
> > leave.
> >
> > I think the only possible exception would be in the case of of the .com
> > registry since it was handed to a firm by the USG.  That seems to imply some
> > sort of control or regulation.
>
> <snip>
>
> --
> 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 127k members/stakeholders 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: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
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 >>>