[ga] Re: 676 2-Letter TLDs...will not fit...?...in the basket ?

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Jim and all,

Jim Fleming wrote:

> 676 2-Letter TLDs...will not fit...?...in the basket ?
>
> ===
>
> If one multiplies 26 times 26 they get 626. That is the number of potential 2-letter TLDs when 26 letters are used.
>
> With the market-based (democratic) approach to TLD recognition, the Best-of-Breed 2-letter TLDs survive.
>
> With the government I* society regulated approach, the 2-letter TLDs have to be restricted to the insiders.
>
> With only 32 or 64 TLDs in the legacy roots, obviously, 626 names can not fit. Some suggest that all 626 names should
>
> be in the legacy roots and only 2-letter names. That would not sit well with .COM and .NET. If all 3-letter TLDs were
>
> included, then that would be 17,576 which experts are being coached to tell people are too many, which is nonsense.

  And this is at the crux of the long standing debates on this issue.  Jim is
of course again correct here.  There is not operational limit to the number
of TLD's that could be created and run safely with the present DNS.
This was tested in 1996 rather extensively...

>
>
> It is too many for the "Staff" to manage and make money from because it dilutes the value with too many. The money is
>
> made in creating artificial scarcity and selling to the demand, not increasing the supply.

  Yes and by restricting artificially the number of TLD's "Best of Breed" is
not possible to emerge in a free market system.  In fact such a restriction
is likely to be a restraint of trade issue as has already been discussed and
debated as well some time ago now..

>
>
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space
>
> With about 256 TLDs in the current legacy roots controlled by the U.S. Government, people can not escape the fact that
>
> not all 2-letter, 3-letter or n-letter TLDs can fit in the legacy roots. Using .COM and .NET as polling places appears to be
>
> the fairest way to let people vote before a TLD is launched. Once launched, then the IN-ADDR.[TLD] zone check is all that
>
> is really needed to make sure an allocation of address space is desired. With a totally automated system, each year, a TLD
>
> can be given extra evaluation to make sure it is the Best-of-Breed. If all 676 2-letter TLDs become the Best-of-Breed, then,
>
> that is apparently what the .ONLINE marketplace wants.
>
> Jim Fleming
> 128-bit DNS is closer than you think...
> COM...DE...NET...ORG...INFO...BIZ...US...ONLINE
> http://ipv8.dyndns.tv
> http://ipv8.dyns.cx
> http://ipv8.no-ip.com
> http://ipv8.no-ip.biz
> http://ipv8.no-ip.info
> http://ipv8.myip.us
> http://ipv8.dyn.ee
> http://ipv8.community.net.au

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@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