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

Re: [wg-c] WG-C report -- final version

To: <wg-c@dnso.org>, "Jonathan Weinberg" <weinberg@mail.msen.com>
Subject: Re: [wg-c] WG-C report -- final version
From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:16:17 +0100
Sender: owner-wg-c@dnso.org

Jonathan,
You have done a great job managing this process but I am forced to vote no
to the WG C report. How many is the wrong question. Recommending an
oligopoly of 6-10 will do nothing for consumer confidence as it will
encourage warehousing and cyber squatting without the differentiation that
is so desperately required.
Philip

Philip Sheppard
AIM - European Brands Association
9  av. des Gaulois  B-1040 Brussels
Tel +322 736 0305 Fax +322 734 6702

Follow-Ups:
- RE: [wg-c] WG-C report -- final version
  - From: "Roeland M. J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
- Re: [wg-c] WG-C report -- final version
  - From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>

Prev by Date: RE: [wg-c] The IAB statement on sharing DNS domain registires
Next by Date: [wg-c] Administrivia
Prev by thread: Re: [wg-c] WG-C report -- final version
Next by thread: RE: [wg-c] WG-C report -- final version
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread