[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week

To: "Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net>
Subject: Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week
From: "William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 08:24:44 -0800 (PST)
Cc: wg-c@dnso.org
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19991221110920.00d67704@pop.interport.net>
Sender: owner-wg-c@dnso.org

On 21-Dec-1999 Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
> Proposed TLD - .anon
> Restriction - may not be used to offer goods or services.  unverifiable
> contact info is not grounds for de-registration
> Registrars - same as above
> Register- same as above

Why impose such a restriction?  What is the basis?  Isn't it up to the buyer to
decide if they want to do business with an entity under such a domain?

I find restrictions like this to be arbitrary and without any real solid basis.

As to the rest of your suggestions, I see you trying to turn the DNS into some
sort of certification authority.  I would never support such a proposal.

--
William X. Walsh <william@dso.net>
DSo Networks  http://dso.net/
Fax: 877-860-5412 or +1-559-851-9192

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week
  - From: "Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>

References:
- Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week
  - From: "Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net>

Prev by Date: Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week
Next by Date: Suggestions (Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week )
Prev by thread: Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week
Next by thread: Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread