[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [wg-c] SV: Consensus and compromises...
At 04:54 AM 9/14/99 , A.M. Rutkowski wrote:
>Practically, there needs to be two processes - one for
>those TLDs for which there is some form of pre-existing
>claim, and the other for those for which there is none.
The set of potential gTLD names for which someone, somewhere has made some
sort of claim is gigantic. Large enough to treat as infinite.
The set of claims which pertain to work done that was IANA sponsored
involves 6 names only, the six developed by the IAHC/POC. Offhand I would
predict that the speicific choice of names is not a criticial point to the
POC. (The choice has incorrectly been attributed to CORE; however the 6
names were selected before CORE was formed.)
All other work was done outside of IANA and is, therefore, unrelated to it.
Those trying to corner the market on one or another name will contest this
statement, of course. And creating that distracting debate is the reason
we were treated to the suggestion that pre-existing claims are an issue, of
Focusing on registry selection is a more appropriate -- and likely to be a
vastly more productive -- line of discussion for the group.
Dave Crocker Tel: +1 408 246 8253
Brandenburg Consulting Fax: +1 408 273 6464
675 Spruce Drive <http://www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>