Re: [wg-c] Re: nine principles for domain names

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 09:24 AM 2/23/2000 +0100, Philip Sheppard wrote:
>The tired set of domain names .firm   .shop   .web   .arts   .rec   .info

tired?  interesting choice of words, since they've yet to be exercised.


>.nom might indeed make an interesting test-bed for the principles. However,
>we envisage a system whereby the applicant registry proposes a gTLD and
>explains what they envisage for that gTLD. The registry describes the market

"we"?

At any rate, no doubt there is appeal, for some, to create a gTLD selection 
process which creates a strong basis for having a registry assert ownership 
rights over the name, but that is not the history of the DNS, nor is it an 
appropriate model.  Given the extensive concern that ICANN have broad 
representation, it will seem quite strange to then hand over name selection 
to closed, profit-oriented registries.  Especially when there is no history 
of such a model for the DNS.


>It would also be practical for the applicant registry to demonstrate how its
>putative gTLD complies with the principles. The principles are not designed
>to test a name per se.

This seems an excellent way to ensure that we never get any new gTLDs.

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