Thus spake "Einar Stefferud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In case you have not noticed, one possible solution is to eliminate all > TLDs other than .COM, which is the only one that you say so may people > believe exists. > > At which point someone will notice that all addresses have a > redundant .COM (because all the other TLDs have been removed, and > so the browsers and mail systems will offer to append (or just assume) > the redundant .COM suffix for you, and voile!...
No, keep the ccTLDs and let each country do with them as they wish. Most countries have a hierarchical namespace within their ccTLD, though a few are flat. Either way, I'll take 250+ flat namespaces (ccTLDs) over one flat namespace (the root). COM is a failed experiment and needs to be closed and/or eliminated. > All all solved for the minor cost of forcing all non .COM domain name > owners to find and register a new non-colliding domain name under > .COM! While international trademark law is a joke at best, each country does have a framework in place which can be used to resolve conflicts within their own ccTLD. This is a lot easier than trying to manage a single global namespace using the WTO's trademark "rules". S
