>> You're trying to get me to believe company-online.com would rather
>> be company-online.com than company.online ?
>
>> I aint buying that, sorry.
>
>We could go on arguing about this for days. Nothing can be determined
>until someone finds out from those people what their reasons were for
>registering in .com in the first place and if the existence of TLDs to
>the right of the hyphen would make a difference.
Right. So we'll have to agree to disagree then.
Maybe now we can get back to the original quesiton.
I'll even add one and say "how can working group C come up
with an answer to the quesiton ''how many new names should
be added and what should they be''
This implies they will all be pulled from a magic hat.
Say they pulled out com/net/org/int.
Would they pick int to be run the way int is run now?
Would they pick net the way net used to be run or the way it's
run now?
Can things change over time? .CA for example?
There's also a lot of talk about "NSI being the one to beat"
in terms of minimal infrastucture reqired to be a registry.
What statrt at the top ? Wouldn't it make more sense to start
at the bottom and find the cctld that's run the most efficiently?
I mean if you have some guy with a laptop in Bermuda running
a tld just fine shouldn't we be looking at minimum barrier to
entry?
Also, the number of tlds is unimportant the rate of insertion of
new domains into the legacy root is.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719
It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR
