RE: [wg-c] Re: A question about .INT (Fwd for Mike StJohns)

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> Behalf Of Dave Crocker
> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 1999 4:23 PM
>
> At 02:47 PM 12/14/1999 , Milton Mueller wrote:
> >My point, in case it still isn't clear, was this: there are
> no serious
> >operational,
> >economic, or policy issues raised when you create TLDs
> narrowly scoped for
> >specific types
> >of registrants. We could introduce 100 of them tomorrow and
> no one would
> >notice -- the
> >only issue would be the administrative one of deciding who
> got to run them.

> 1.  We've made no progress in 5 years creating ANY TLDs, generic or
> sponsored.  Hence, creating and exercising the administrative
> capability to
> add some is a highly non-trivial demonstration.

Both true and false,
	1) we have made some progress
	2) we haven't made enough progress

> 2.  Given the history of this activity, dismissing the administrative
> difficulties involved in selecting sTLDs and assigning registration
> authority for them is truly bizarre.  The best guess is that
> missing this
> point distinguishes between the perspectives of pragmatic
> operations focus,
> versus naive academic curiosity.

1) What's an sTLD?
2) I don't agree that such dismissal was Milton's point.
3) The registry doesn't create TLDs and then try to find an operator.
Rather, a candidate operator creates a TLD, with concept plan, and
approaches the root registry for the purpose of registering the new TLD for
operation. In short, your process model is inverted, this is creating the
confusion in your mind.