RE: [wg-c] new TLDs

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

So says you, discounting the example because it was IANA
itself. It makes no difference.

A phone call came in, the idea was to have a .INT registry,
the registry was created, the TLD added, and, for lack of
anyone else WILLING to run it, IANA did.

The same is happening with .EU now - the idea has been
forwarded, and it appears that it will be created. As for
who will run it, that's an open question as I understand it.

But I will tell you, if it goes in before some of the
longer-standing prospective registries, there will be
trouble. You'll now accuse me of making threats - let me
save you the trouble: I'm making threats. Please focus
on this issue rather than the more substantive examples above.

Oh yeah, one more ad hominem - you're an idiot.

Christopher

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 11:04 AM
To: Christopher Ambler
Cc: 'wgc'
Subject: RE: [wg-c] new TLDs


At 10:54 AM 12/26/1999 , Christopher Ambler wrote:
>Dave delights in taking to task people who make sweeping
>dismissals yet fail to give any explanation whatsoever.
>Pots, kettles, and all that jazz.
>
>As I see it, .INT is a classic example of a TLD conceived,
>created, and operated. I'm sure we all know the story.

Thanks for the ad hominem.  A TLD registry operated by IANA, itself, hardly
counts as a meaningful precedent for the current discussion.  As such, .INT
is quite unique, rather than classic.

Do you have any serious examples of TLDs that were defined by the registry
that operates them?

d/

=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker  <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg Consulting  <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253,  Fax: +1.408.273.6464
675 Spruce Drive,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA