<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [registrars] Proposed Ballots
> I understand the purpose, but in practice, will this require
> gTLD applicants to have a prior arrangement with an
> accredited provider? Or only that if approved, they must
> either become or use an accredited provider? I'm not sure I'm
> getting how this will facilitate competition. It seems a
> little like the chicken or the egg issue.
It simply builds incentives for prospective delegants to choose from
operators other than the Neulevel, Afilias or Verisign. If every single
new delegant chooses an existing operator, then we don't see the real
benefits of competition - we end up creating a bunch of new TLDs, as you
point out, that each of us care about to differing degrees. Registrars
saw a lot of benefits that were created when Neulevel and Afilias pushed
the envelope. Verisign has mostly caught up now and we've stopped seeing
a lot of the benefits. We need more players - technical and otherwise.
>
> >- that delegants and operators be encouraged to leverage existing
> registry
> >protocols and not create new ones
>
> This seems to imply that the best protocols already exist. I
> agree that life would be much easier if we had a single
> protocol to deal with. On the other hand I would not want to
> stifle innovation and potential future benefits to save a
> little time today. Besides, so far, even with EPP, each
> implementation has been different. I don't think we could
> support this ballot with this comment as part of it.
>
No, it implies that new operators should be encouraged to use existing
protocols unless they have demonstrably better ideas. These are the same
rules that we played by in the last round and instead of creating a
bunch of new RRP registries, we ended up with a bunch of players that
worked together and settled on a better idea. We should continue to
encourage this spirit of cooperation.
If you have a better way to get these points across, please put forward
an amendment - positive criticism is always a useful tool for change.
-rwr
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|