Re: [wg-c] more on non-shaired gTLDs

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 03:35:40PM -0800, Rick H Wesson wrote:
> kent,
> 
> the context is "6 to 10 additional gTLDs" ie the testbed of new
> registries.

Doesn't matter.

> your suggestions assume that the registrant population could be
> controlled requiring some gTLDs to restrict whom might register under it.

Nope.  "Control" is not a necessary factor.  Chartered or not, enforced 
or not, controlled or not, .museum isn't going to have as many 
registrations as .shop, .info, .web, or even .nom.

> Why should we pick some names with a potentially small pool of potential
> registrants.

Precisely because it's a testbed.  If we screw up we have a smaller mess
to clean up.

[...]

> for instance, if the testbed doesn't work and we cant create additional
> gTLDs until we clean up our mess, then we have potentially created 6 to 10
> new problems that could be as large as the NSI problem has been.  

Yes.  Precisely.  

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain