Return to newtlds Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
Username: |
WorldThoughts |
Date/Time: |
Tue, June 27, 2000 at 3:04 PM GMT |
Browser: |
Netscape Communicator V4.08 using Windows 95 |
Score: |
5 |
Subject: |
Reply |
Message: |
|
Terrific. Now are you SURE that the other companies you mentioned are up to the task
of being REGISTRIES? That is a different function than that which they currently
have, which is being registrars. I have no problem with one company per gTLD. But
once you begin NAMING the other companies that SHOULD be taking the other gTLDs
(.net and .org in your proposal), you need to make sure you know the precise capabilities
of the companies. Furthermore, by stating which of the innumberable companies should
be the respective registries, you have the burden of explaining those choices over
the others. I don't really intend this as a challenge--just as an observation. Your
theory is sound. Your specifications bring up too many questions and is inherently
filled with micro-holes to macro-fissures. Furthermore, we can't just debunk NSI
as the registry for those three gTLDs. They are no longer the monopoly as registrar.
But their current contract as registry protects them as much as it binds them, I
imagine. One must wait for NSI's contract to be up. Did I hear something about
2007?
|
| |
Message Thread:
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy