[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-c] Choosing the intial testbed
At 10:09 PM 3/21/00 -0500, James Love wrote:
>and .org), it may not be extremely important which ones go first, but it
>will probably be important enough to be controversial.
It should not be that important, no. However, those who get in first
presumably have a competitive advantage, since there is such agitation
about having for-profit registries. That goes away, of course, of the
registries are non-profit.
A realted question is whether the names are selected separately from
selecting the registries that administer them -- making the name choices
far less controversial -- or whether the activity is tied to particular
>I propose the decision making be decentralized. I would recommend 3 be
>selected by the business/registrar constituencies, 3 by the
>non-commercial domain holders, and 3 selected by the ICANN at large
>members, in an online vote. That's 9, and the 10th could be selected in
The basic idea of having a broad effort is quite reasonable. The problem
with your particular choices are that, as noted, there won't be an
operational at-large mechanism for something. The other problem is that
there has not been a particularly active, and certainly not coherent, and
most especially not representative, non-commercial domain holder's
Having already participated in an effort to produce a list of 7 names, I'm
disinclined to do it again, myself.
>some other way. Perhaps a lottery by those with "pioneer" proposals, or
You would consider giving the rogue registry participants -- the folks who
tried to replace the IANA DNS root system -- special position???
Dave Crocker <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Brandenburg Consulting <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253, Fax: +1.408.273.6464
675 Spruce Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA