Re: [wg-c] reposted for Harald Tveit Alvestrand

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

> > Under your definition, currently we HAVE competing roots. Under your
> > definition, ICANN/IANA is a coordination body for ONE of those competing
> > roots.
> 
> Exactly (modulo the fact that there is dispute whether the mere existance
> of such competing systems can cross-confuse DNS impelementation.)
> 
> And the conclusion that one should draw is that all thse rules and
> regulations about how many TLDs and what UDRP's to apply and what fees are
> to be charged are merely ICANN local decisions that need not obtain under
> other root system operators.
> 
> I've said as much several times.
> 
> One of the prime reasons for all of this is to try to get folks to realize
> that hard-nosed positions, such as "No new TLDs" can readily lead to
> somebody actually spending some serious money and turning one of the
> marginal "other" root systems into something viable and adding TLDs there.
> 
> 		--karl--

Great, so now if we can all agree on that, then maybe the "I want *my* TLD
*NOW*" crowd can get together with you and go off and show us all how to
make an alternative root meaningful. Oh, sorry, I forgot that there have
been three or four ongoing attempts already and as that doesn't work, they
instead try to shove "their" TLD down IANA/ICANNs throat.
Problem is that they don't seem to agree with the framework that IANA/ICANN
would like (which isn't that different from what IAHC suggested a while
back), and keep stopping ANY addition of ANYTHING. After all, if it isn't
*THEIR* TLD, then they don't want ANYTHING.


Yours, John Broomfield.