On 8/8/2022 2:24 PM, John Levine wrote:
It appears that Vittorio Bertola <[email protected]> said:
1) Why should these people get for free something which everybody else is
required to pay $200'000 for?
Remember that $200K is just the starting point. Google paid $25M for
.APP, GMO paid $41M for .SHOP and Verisign paid $135M for .WEB.
In my experience, the people doing namespace experiments don't just want a name
to to use. They
want a "good" name like .PET.
If we came up with a process to reserve random top level names like
.lxaokwzyhedw
or .nifacsyzudxt, I doubt we'd get much pushback from the ICANN community, but I
also don't think any of the experiments would use them.
It has become egregiously clear that memorable top level names are worth a lot
of money and I
see no basis for the IETF to give them away to anyone. While I don't think
.ALT is valuable
(nobody bid for it in any of the rounds to date) I also don't think anyone will
use it because
it is not "good" enough.
On the other hand, there are plenty of top level domains in which to
register "pet.TLD" or "gns.TLD" or something else that might be
appropriate. That will cost something, but nowhere near $200K, let alone
$25M. That's as close a permission-less innovation that one could get.
-- Christian Huitema
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
