RE: [wg-c] New gTLDs and ISPs (was: URGENT . . . )

["A.M. Rutkowski" <amr@netmagic.com>]

Hi Mark,

> expansion on the Internet. Virtually all
> comments have been avariciously,
> selfishly, or academically motivated, with no regard for the actual
> effects
> that recommendations will have on the Internet, or its broad base of
> diverse

heavy stuff, dude.  May be time to lighten up.


> 1) Recommendations made by WG-C must not
> adversely affect the ubiquity of
> the Internet (no logical partitioning should result from any
> namespace
> expansion). 
> 2) Recommendations of the WG-C must not compromise the usability of
> the
> Internet for any of its constituencies. This includes end-users and ISPs.

This is like back to X.400 days.  If these "rules" had
been
in place, the Internet wouldn't have happened.  Let's see,
there was bitnet, uucp, the old UK reverse naming, fidonet,
x.400 gateways, proprietary mail gateways,...

I recommend we outsource this all to Paul Mokapetris.

-tony