RE: [ga] About GA membership again......

["Peter de Blanc" <pdeblanc@usvi.net>]

Re: The press release: "ADNS NEWSLETTER: ASLAN SERVER VISIBILITY JUMPS..."

Perhaps a bit pushy- however...

I feel there is some merit in considering the past work in alternative or
'additional' TLDs. There is a thin line between what 'might' have been
experiments in the true 'RFC' sense of consensus formation, regarding
insertion of new TLDs, and some of the almost 'Pirate like' underground
activities that developed around 'Alternic' and other groups.

If, for example, there was a root server in switzerland, called 'Z', and it
contained 'alternative', 'enhanced' 'additional' TLD's, and 1000 or so of
the worlds major ISP's updated their DNS cache from it, there 'might' be
enough consensus to make the new TLDs 'valid enough'.

The point I am making is, with consensus, anything can happen.

With enough consensus, new TLDs can be inserted into the 'A' root server as
well.

Perhaps we can measure our success here in the GA, and in ICANN in general,
by the speed with which we can form consensus.

Since we have this forum, why not see if we can increase our speed of
consensus formation WRT new TLDs? And if some of those potential new TLDs
happen to be the ones in the 'alternative root' systems, would it matter?

Peter de Blanc
.VI Admin



Simon Higgs wrote:
>
>
>I'd also like to propose that the pre-IAHC work with IANA be recognized
,
>and that an iTLD constituency be created. Constituents can from known
>contributors to the Jon Postel new TLD/registry drafts, or other new
>TLD/registry Internet Drafts published during 1996, or are named on the

>iTLD applicant list that Jon Postel published on behalf of IANA to
>iahc-discuss. The purpose of the iTLD Constituency is to create new
>registries that will compete at the registry-level with NSI (currently
no
>competition exists for gTLDs or rTLDs at the registry-level).
>

--
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