Re: [wg-c] GTLD Straw poll

["Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@dninet.net>]

i find that approach not at all practical. the lottery concept makes
absolutely no sense either.

the best approach i feel is a "bid" basis for managing registries . you set
up an evaluation committee which consists of primarily technical-oriented
persons to assure that proper resources & technology is there for each
prospective bidder and place the emphasis on quality & efficiency as well as
cost to deliver the services.

the concept of shared registries is also very intriguing as well as it could
create "healthy" competition
between registry mgt. companies co-managing  the same gtld


ken
----- Original Message -----
From: A.M. Rutkowski <amr@netmagic.com>
To: Kevin J. Connolly <CONNOLLK@rspab.com>; <wg-c@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 1999 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: [wg-c] GTLD Straw poll


> At 07:54 PM 8/17/99 , Kevin J. Connolly wrote:
> >in the root.  That's what we're here to discuss; that's
> >what you keep trying to pull the discussion away from;
>
> OK.  We have lots of common agreement.
>
> Why not agree the new TLDs are brand names, let
> the legacy maintainers hold onto their brands,
> and parcel out the rest by some mutually agreeable
> fair method (e.g., lottery)
>
>
> --tony
>