Re[2]: [wg-c] Eureka?

["William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>]

Monday, August 09, 1999, 12:08:00 AM, Javier SOLA <javier@aui.es> wrote:

> The point is about scarce resources, not about companies that operate in an
> unlimited market. You can compete as a portal or a bookstore in the
> Internet. There might be as many of these as they wish to be, but only one
> registry can be ".info". It is a natural monopoly, and it is not a good
> idea to give it to somebody to explote it. One was given temporarily to
> NSI, and look what happened... or data, handed to a US Government
> contractor for handling the registry is considered by them now as their
> private property, and they have discontinued data services, a a proper
> whois...  Is that a free market?  If it was a bookstore, I would move to
> another one, I cannot do that here.

If there are competitive TLDs and competitive registries, you most
certainly CAN move to another one, and elect which one to do business
with in the future as well.  This is a powerful decision you have to
make.

Lets look at what you said, you address what happened with NSI as what
happens when a company is given "control" of a TLD.  But this doesn't
compare AT ALL to how that company will perform when it has to face
REAL competition at the TLD/Registry level, competing both in service
quality, bundled services, support, etc etc etc.

To say that because a MONOPOLY acted in a fashion you do not like is a
indicative of how commercial competitive registries will act and
perform is irresponsible, and uses flawed logic.

There is quite simply NO historical precedent to back up your
statements.

Instead of making anticommercial/anticompetitive rules, lets come up
with solutions that address your concerns and that can coexist in an
open competitive market.

Data control is an interesting issue.  I would say that for a registry
to get its TLD added to the root, they might have to enter into a
contract with ICANN that should the registry become insolvent, the
database goes into the "Custodianship" of ICANN pending assigned to a
new registry operator.  This registry operator can be compensated for
initial costs of taking over this operation by a mandatory "bond" of a
reasonable amount of funds to cover the costs of continued operation
of the registry by a new organization in the event of the registry
becoming insolvent or unable to continue operations for whatever
reason(specifics to be spelled out in the contracts).

How would a suggestion like this NOT solve the concerns you have
raised?


--
William X. Walsh
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
Email: william@dso.net  Fax:(209) 671-7934


(IDNO MEMBER)
Support the Cyberspace Association, the 
constituency of Individual Domain Name Owners 
http://www.idno.org