Re: [wg-c] Compromise proposal

[John Charles Broomfield <jbroom@manta.outremer.com>]

> Hi John Charles,
> 
> >1-what rights does the registry have vis-a-vis ICANN and the particular TLD
> >  it is doing the registry work for?
> 
> A subset of this is - what right to existing registrees have?
> 
> CORE Registrars have for some time sold (and continue
> to sell) new TLDs predicated on the assertion that
> their customers will get first-come, first-served access
> to those TLDs.  It's not clear how these rights are resolved
> vis-a-vis eachother or vis-a-vis non-CORE registrars.
> --tony

*PERSONAL OPINION 100% FOLLOWS*
All depends what you call existing registrees. As far as I'm concerned,
anything sold by CORE registrars (I'm not talking about current sales of
com/net/org by CORE registrars) in the gTLDs that CORE expected to have
introduced is just vaporware. They built on *assumptions*, not facts. These
assumptions were by them. Same goes for IOD & ".web" or Iperdome and ".per".

I can collect all the names of all my friends, create a database, setup a
DNS server with "smith.friend" "doe.friend" and a thousand more (being
optimistic on what I call a friend here!), and suddenly claim I have
existing registrants under my lovely ".friend" TLD and demand it be
introduced and given to me.

I see all of those registrations as 100% pure speculation. Truth of the
matter, I have yet to see ANYONE use a ".web" address, a ".firm" address or
a ".whatever" address apart from those under TLDs in the IANA/ICANN roots.
When I say "use" I mean in a wide and external way. Sure that Karl can have
customers deciding to use amongst themselves "something.prv", but they know
what they get, they know what they have, and any other expectancy is just
wishful thinking. Everyone is free to setup their own private name & number
schemes.
My office extension number is 106. I'd *love* (or maybe not, because I might
get flooded, dunno) it to be possible for everyone in the world to dial
"106" and my phone ring, but I understand perfectly that "106" just works
within my company. Trying to push my internal numbering scheme upon the
world is wishful thinking.
I can sell telephone extensions to my PBX if I want (operator license
considerations apart of course), and claim I have customers on my PBX. From
there to say that because I have customers with extensions on my PBX, they
MUST have world visibility in exactly the same way as they have it within my
PBX is, as I've said, wishful thinking.

I see some CORE registrars (note that each CORE registrar took the decision
independently and with no advice from CORE on it), IOD & Iperdome as having
jumped the gun in a rather bad way.
I think that Iperdome managed to do the best effort at damage control by
giving them all X.per.to (it IS that, isn't it?) domains, and not promising
(directly or veiled) anything else. Dunno if IOD has done something similar.

In short, as far as I'm concerned, they have no rights.

Then again, it's probably well out of the scope of this WG to decide.

Yours, John Broomfield.