Re: Wrong Question (Was Re: [wg-c] compromise proposal)

["William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>]

On 11-Sep-99 J. William Semich wrote:
> Of course, as you know, Milton, there are many more totally open ccTLDs
> than "...and.nu"
> 
> Starting with the well-established .uk, .dk, .ch, .li, .nz, through the
> more recent .gg, .je, .cc, .to, .fm, .am, .cx, .nf, .hm,  and many many more.

But this doesn't change the fact that your position is clearly one of..self
interest.  Not to say thats a bad thing, but it needs to be pointed out for
clarification.  

 
> But this discussion is about gTLDs, remember?? Which currently only means
> .com, .net and .org
>
> More helpful in this discussion would be your response to the
> public-interest question of "Why do users need new gTLDs and How should we
> go about creating them to best serve that need?"  

I don't think "why" is in our workgroup's purview.  There is a huge demand for
new TLDs.  I can point to several pieces of evidence of this, including the
high traffic to CORE member sites when they....mislead....some people about
"their" 7 new gTLDs.  Further, there is evidence in the comments on the USG
green and white paper regarding a desirability for new TLDs.

Why is because there is a paucity of choice, not to mention a paucity of
competition, in the gTLD arena.  Competition and choice are a good thing.  When
the Internet Domain Name system was being implement, as the Internet grew,
there was a need for a more defined structure, and a more limited model.  The
fact is we have outgrown that structure now, and no longer need it.

Let's here some real answers from you, so that maybe your comments can be
seen as something more than self serving.

Why do you oppose the concept of new gTLDs?  What principles are behind that
position?  What concerns do you feel need to be addressed?

Lets get to substance.  We need to come up with a solution.  And ALL of us need
to put some of our self interest aside.

For myself, I have very little personal "invested" interest in this process
anymore (beyond my operation of the dnspolicy.com website), except that I do
operate a couple free third level domain registries, but I do not see that as
any compelling self interest or conflict of interest in this process.

But I AM a domain name holder, and someone who registers domains every day for
my customers, and frequently for myself.  I hold domains in under com/net/org
as well as under 5 ccTLDs.  I am concerned about the fact that I have a
customer who had to settle for an absolutely horrendous domain name because
every possible combination of words under 20 characters were taken.  He doesn't
have a domain name, he has a sentence.  And it's not a very memorable moniker. 
His only alternative to a long and clunky domain was to go with a ccTLD, which
is not commercially attractive for a business such as his.

I'm concerned that if we only create a few top level domains, at the rate of
growth in the domain name industry it will take very little time for those
registries to be as depleted as .com is now, and we will have done very little
to bring about a real competitive market.

These are some of the concerns I bring to this issue, and are really just a few
of the reasons I remain involved in this process.

--
William X. Walsh - DSo Internet Services
Email: william@dso.net  Fax:(209) 671-7934
Editor of http://www.dnspolicy.com/
 
Join DNSPolicy.com's discussion list!
http://www.dnspolicy.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/discuss
<IDNO MEMBER> http://www.idno.org