Re: [ga] Critics say VeriSign still has...
I've always said that the only real difference between a TLD and an
SLD is the responsibility at the top level. As far as I am concerned,
being assured that the technical operational reliability is what ICANN
should be concerned with and not the business model and certainly
not the mnemonics of it. Along with that technical operational
reliability comes the financial capability of performance. However,
even that is not too much of a concern. If a registry can set it up,
they have the means to do it.
For that matter, in a free market, businesses do fail. It should not
be up to ICANN to ensure the financial success or failure of a
registry. The only contingency should be a portable database that
can be used by an interim manager in case of failure and enough
notice to be able to transport it.
I truly believe that if DoC had risen off its collective rear and added
TLDs years ago, we would not have had a fraction of the
controversy we see now. It's just ridiculous.
> Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 email@example.com wrote:
> > > How about shortage? How about inflation?
> > The shortage is completely artificial. The inflation is due largely
> > to the artificial scarcity.
> Technically there is almost no difference between creating a domain at
> one level vs. at another. It doesn't matter much whether you're
> a new top level domain, .xyz
> a second level domain, xyz.com
> or third level, xyz.example.com.
> In all cases you have to:
> 1) either set up one or more nameservers for the new domain
> or add the domain's info to some existing nameservers
> 2) add a pointer record on the nameserver for the parent domain
> that says where to find records for the child domain
> That's it.
> Part 1 may be considerable work, depending on how the domain is to be
> organised, but it is done by the domain holder or his ISP.
> Part 2 is basically pretty simple. Any competent DNS administrator can
> do it, for a third or fourth level domain within his organisation, in
> a few of minutes.
> However, if you need it done reliably and consistently for large
> numbers of domains, with the information replicated to multiple
> servers, then it is a fairly complex job. Also, if it is near the top
> of the hierarchy, then having it work reliably becomes important.
> Basically, the registries and registrars exist to deal with the issues
> in the previous paragraph.
> The only technical difference between creating xyz.com and creating a
> new TLD .xyz are:
> where you put the pointer to it, in records for .com or in the root
> whether people can find it directly from the root or
> So there is no technical reason we cannot create new TLDs as fast as
> we are currently creating .com domains.
> Nor is there any technical reason for a price difference between a TLD
> (for which it costs $50,000 just to apply) and a second level domain
> you can register for $20 or so. The work involved is nearly identical.
> Arguably there are economic, political, historical, business, ...
> reasons not to create new TLDs wholesale, but there's certainly no
> technical obstacle. -- This message was passed to you via the
> firstname.lastname@example.org list. Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message). Archives at
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html