On 29-Oct-99 Esther Dyson wrote:
> It seems to me that if you read each word very carefully,
> he's saying: no *monopoly* TLDs, not "no competitive TLDs."
>
What exactly constitutes a monopoly TLD, one like NSI enjoyed for the last
few years being the sole registrar or one NSI enjoys now as the registry?
Face it, for anything to actually work, there will be a monopoly granted
at some level. Unless we throw out the IETF and replace it with a system
designed by Bob Allisat, we can't all be operating our own registries
for the same .TLDs. Somewhere each one is going to have to be assigned to
some lucky entity.
Because of the way competition has been implemented with .com/.net/.org
I would say what this means is if/when a new TLD actually gets introduced
to the roots, it will have to be open to competing registrars.
For example:
That means if Jay stuck it out and his ship eventually came in, he wouldn't
be granted the sole means to reg .per domains, he'd have to open it up
to other registrars although at some level the .per registry needs to be
consolidated, so Iperdome would then get the registry for .per and that,
is a monopoly.
-mark
---
|||| mark jeftovic (MJ177) ==== http://stuntpope.cyberpunk.cc/ ||||
|||| easyDNS Technologies Inc. ==== http://www.easyDNS.com/ ||||
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dns hosting / domain registrations / web forwarding / mail forwarding / etc
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
