[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[comments-gtlds] Root Servers with LESS TLDs...

@@@@ From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com> 

"In particular, every TLD needs to be up for an extensive public
comment period, and there needs to be a process for evaluating those
comments.  It can't just be a vote of the GA, or the SOs."


A couple of comments...

1. I think that many of the existing legacy TLDs should be removed.
They are clearly not being used and not of interest to people in the
"Internet Community". Maybe ICANN should FIRST work on the
existing TLDs ? and give them some "extensive public discussion",
as Kent Crispin suggests.


2. In my opinion, prudent Root Name Server Cluster (RSC) operators
will likely be moving to a SMALLER root zone, now that the U.S.
Government and the ICANN have made their intentions clear.
With .ARPA, .COM, .NET, .GOV, .ORG, .INT, .EDU, and .MIL
many of the major areas are covered especially when you consider
the massive -DLD.TLD combinations.


3. I think a high priority should be to migrate companies from
the NAME.COM format to the -DLD.COM format. Clearly, we can
not assume that all companies will want -COM.COM, although
that appears to be desirable since registrars are grabbing what
some might feel are the "good names". Anyone with a famous
mark has probably already protected it since they have been
following all of these discussions closely.

4. The -DLD.TLD format will allow everyone to step back and
decide on what they really, really, want TLDs to be. I suggest that
the notion of a Realm or UnirVerse be used to select TLDs.
Unfortunately, you can only appreciate that in a 3D or 4D world.
These 2D worlds of e-mail do not do it justice. That will likely
require input from a broader community than currently addressed
by the ICANN constituencies in the ASOs, DSOs and PSOs.
(See http://www.awcommunity.org for one small example)

Jim Fleming