RE: [wg-c] application documents requirements

[Josh Elliott <jelliott@tucows.com>]

Yes (of course in theory - this is WG-C!), but just because we cannot think
of a different model, should we limit the system to only perform under one
model?  I think the minimum criteria should be that an open gTLD have an
acceptable competitive structure.  What we will most likely see is all
proposals of registry/registrar models, but we are not limiting the system
to new ideas.  Saying we have all the answers is not the solution or
strategy we need to convey.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-c@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Kent
> Crispin
> Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 6:46 AM
> To: wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-c] application documents requirements
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 05:54:38AM -0800, Josh Elliott wrote:
> > I don't think it is realistic to think that ICANN will approve new
> > monopolies in the DNS.  While we haven't necessarily come to
> consensus on
> > this point, it does not makes sense to argue such an issue.  Do people
> > really think that if we come to consensus that there could be new
> > monopolies, ICANN and DOC would consider it?
> >
> > I do think, however, it is reasonable to assume there could be other
> > competitive models other than a registry/registrar model.
>
> In theory, of course.  For chartered TLDs, there are very wide
> possibilites.  But as far as open gTLDs, in practice any other models
> are going to require intense scrutiny and indefinite debate.
>
> --
> Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
> kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain