Return to newtlds Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: kodo
Date/Time: Thu, June 15, 2000 at 4:52 AM GMT (Wed, June 14, 2000 at 11:52 PM EST)
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: 7 Questions

Message:
 

 
Q1: In the introduction of new TLDs, what steps should be taken to coordinate with the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, and other organizations dealing with Internet protocols and standards?

You should not "coordinate" with them at all! Give them a time-limit (say 6 months) and then let them make the complete recommendation for a decision. After they have presented their findings - public comments should be accepted. As another astute poster mentioned - the knowledge of the last 6 years should be taken into consideration to save countless hours of rehashing the same material over and over again.

Q2: What stability concerns are associated with the initial phases of registration within the TLD?

Obviously the massive onslaught of registrations on "opening day" is going to cause problems. Depending upon the TLDS that are chosen - this could be controlled, or it could bring down servers. The biggest problem is the 'Who's first?' question. How will they implement this registration? A round-robin method? or some other time-share system? The second that the TLD string is announced, speculators will be loading dictionary files to try to "land grab" all the common words - create the same 'artificial scarcity' that exists in the .com TLD now. Overload is the primary stability concern.

Q3: What can be done to eliminate or reduce these stability concerns?

Round-robin schemes, lottery, or time-share of some sort. Possibly allowing a 'pre-registration' process (with no promise or guarantee of any kind) to determine which names are going to cause the most problematic.  There are probably only 2 or 3 people in the world who want 'www.lepidopterist.tld' but you can bet money that 10,000 or more will be in line to register 'www.buy.tld'.

Q4: Would these stability concerns be magnified by introducing a large number of TLDs at once?

Actually I think the opposite would hold true. Granted, there are some 'professional cybersquatters' out there who would in line for all of them. But, for the average company (or individual) the more choices there are - the less chance there would be of created a run on opening day. After all, if I could choose from 30 different TLDS, I wouldn't feel so bad if my first two choices were already taken - I would have 28 other options to select from. The only reason that .coms are costing upwards of 7 figures is 'Artificial Scarcity'. There is a short supply and a very high demand. Increase the supply and eventually you will catch up with and fulfill the demand.

Q5: Are there any practical means of reversing the introduction of a significant new TLD once it goes into operation?

A "significant" one? No. A "trivial" one? Yes... If you introduce something like .web as a TLD you are going to have millions of people hopping on board. And, once they spend the time, money and effort to set up servers, sites, and establish a name for themselves -  they aren't going to be too happy if you pull the plug on them. However, if you use a TLD such as .xyz and only 5,000 or so have registered there - and you refund the price that they paid to register their domain name. Then, you could quite possibly reverse the decision and get away with it. They aren't going to be happy about it. But, you can deal with 5,000 pissed off people much better than you can 1,000,000+ irate Netizens.

Q6: Is it feasible to introduce a TLD on a "trial basis," giving clear notice that the TLD might be discontinued after the trial is completed?

Yes. If you do not charge up-front for the TLD, or if you offer full refunds to the people who have bought the domains. You could implement a "rent-to-own" scheme whereby you charge monthly for the domain - with the option to buy larger blocks of time if the trial is successful. So, say that you are charging USD $35 / yr. for a domain name in the new TLD. If you charge the customer $2.90 per month for the right to use the name - and then cancel it after 6 months, you could in theory offer a "trial basis". However, if the trials go well, and you decide to keep the TLD - the customer would have the option of buying 1 - 3 year blocks of time (pro-rated for the amount that he already paid into the system).
    
Q7: To ensure continued stability, what characteristics should be sought in a proposed TLD and in the organization(s) proposing to sponsor and/or operate it?


I would look for these characteristics: history (how is there past performance?), reliability (do they have a proven track record?), longetivity (is their company or organization enduring?), leadership (do they have good management?), public opinion (does the public like them? do they trust them?).

For the record I must state - Network Solutions should automatically be disqualified from participating in this effort. They have held and iron-grip on the DNS for years and they are a monopoly. Until they render FULL control to the root servers to ICANN (in 7 years) they should not be allowed to create, run, manage, operate, consult, control, or be involved with a TLD in any way shape or form. Any company who already has a conflicting intrest regarding TLDS should NOT be allowed to be involved.

In their SEC filing (form S-3) from 1999 Nework Solutions clearly states:

"... promoting the use of .com, .net and .org top level domains as the preferred Internet identities"


This clearly is not the type of company I want to be buying my new TLD from!
       
     

 


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy