Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: EasyTech
Date/Time: Wed, October 31, 2001 at 4:35 PM GMT (Wed, October 31, 2001 at 5:35 PM CET)
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V6.0 using Windows 98
Subject: my answer


Simon, you are looking at situation from wrong viewpoint.
We are talking TLD here.
Are you seriously saying, that ICANN will allow the .shop TLD?
--> I never said that, where did you get that?
But I think whenever there is a next round of introducing new TLDs, will THE player that couldn't be ignorated by ICANN. Maybe could select two or three of their domains for the USG root. But ICANN won't duplicate TLDs from because this would really lead to confusion: 71 mil (maybe more in the future) users will get New.nets domains, the others will get the ICANN domains.
ICANN could duplicate .info, .biz, .pro, .name because they are carried in roots that are accessible by not many people and there is nearly zero content.

AND all the hundred other TLDs?
--> I think is the only one with that much TLDs

Me> "it has no legitimacy."
You> Who in the world has a legitimacy to introduce TLDs? Everyone could do that.

Only ICANN (US Government QUANGO) has legitimacy to put TLDs on *THE* root.
--> No question, you're right.

But your initial suggestion was:

  "As PoC can be done on Alternate roots - ICANN should set up .ALT - a closed TLD for applicants.

Using .WEB as example:

They are given .web.alt to conduct business.

So current toysite.web will be toysite.web.alt

emails would go to info@toysite.web.alt

This is until .web allowed full TLD status - or shown to be incompetent (chucked off)."

And I said it (access via USG root) is already available for and


Message Thread:

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy