Ed and all,
Ed Gerck wrote:
> Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> > Ed and all,
> >
> > Ed Gerck wrote:
> >
> >
> > > However, and this was perhaps another obscure point in my example with .com --
>even
> > > if some "Router Resource" disagrees with me and decides to go head on and accept
> > > domains for DNS servers which conflict with anyone else, that would have no
>effect
> > > whatsoever on the operational part of the Internet. Each user controls which
> > > Router Resources they want to use (eg, NSI, SuperRoot, ORSC, etc.) -- the
>decision
> > > to trust is entirely in the user's hands, where the risk is.
> >
> > This is of course one course of process. However would these TLD's that you
> > indirectly refer to be globally "SEEN" without special convention?
>
> Not my problem and actually, my point -- that is why I consider them A Bad Idea,
>just to
> beat that dead horse again.
Agreed, and the gist of my original suggestion to you with respect to TM
issues.
> That is also why they are self-defeating as a business model, to a large extent.
>However,
> they can be useful in some special applications (eg, as I have mentioned in another
>URL).
Yes indeed they can and indeed are in private networks or subscribed
networks (eg Portals from a legacy root based DN/web page). This however
does not provide much usefulness in adding additional TLD's for which
expansion of the name space can be achieved as is perceived to be
desired/needed by many.
>
>
> > To
> > that extent intersubjectively, would they be useful as to availability to all?
>
> That is it -- *exactly** because they are not available to all, they must remain
> intersubjective within a small group, thus not a large threat to the overall
>Internet.
True, and a such not very useful in a largess sense.
>
>
> > > Which just defuses
> > > the need for worldwide regulation on this matter -- though there may be problems
> > > with trademarks issues in specific jurisdictions (for example, publicly selling
> > > pepsi.com) for those that choose to ignore the problems ;-)
> >
> > In ignoring those problems to which you refer, Ed, opens up legal
> > exposure to those that choose to do so.
>
> Yes, and much thanks for simplying my long phrase. That is why I suggested NOT to
>ignore
> them -- as my phrase above says: "though there may be problems... for those that
>choose to
> ignore the problems".
I am not sure what you are referring to as "Them" here. Could you clarify?
If by them, you are meaning TLD's within an IntrAnet or Extranet, than I
can concur with your point here entirely. If not than, it is likely you are
mistaken. Please clarify, if you would. >;)
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ed Gerck
>
>
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
