Return to tldapps Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
Username: |
adoyle |
Date/Time: |
Tue, October 31, 2000 at 8:23 PM GMT |
Browser: |
Netscape Communicator V4.75 using Windows NT 5.0 |
Score: |
5 |
Subject: |
.geo plus .i = ? |
Message: |
|
SRI International has applied for the .geo TLD (Top Level
Domain) under the current ICANN application process. Sarnoff Corporation has applied
for the .i TLD in a joint application with Atomic Tangerine, Inc. and NextDNS, Inc.
Sarnoff Corporation is wholly owned by SRI International, Atomic Tangerine is 40%
owned by SRI International and NextDNS is a new venture whose "principal stakeholders
of NextDNS include Sarnoff, AtomicTangerine, and Arnhold and S. Bleichroeder, Inc." The
two proposals sound quite similar in how they wax enthusiastic about the potential
benefits of the TLDs. In both cases, the DNS (Domain Name System) is to be used as
a fast indexing mechanism to allow the creation of new services. What's extremely
intriguing about this is that the .geo proposal aims to provide access to every place
on earth by providing a name space which allows indexing of everything that has a
location. The .i proposal aims to provide access to every person and device on earth
by providing a name space which allows indexing of every person and device by a unique
identifying number. While I'm willing to believe (given the fact that I've been
part of a large company before) that the two proposals were independently submitted,
I do have to wonder at what would happen if a single entity (SRI International in
this case) were to control access to two vast information spaces such as this. [cross
posted to the .geo and .i threads]
|
| |
Message Thread:
- .i Application by Sarnoff Corporation Moderator, October 7 @ 10:21 PM (30/38)
- .i TLD and Single Letters B. Ferns, November 5 @ 8:41 PM (0/0)
- A completely outsourced solution - with some interesting costs griffiths, November 5 @ 8:09 PM (0/0)
- Time for a people-centric TLD skey, November 5 @ 7:42 PM (0/0)
- a badly needed idea!!! spareek, November 5 @ 5:09 PM (0/0)
- .i proposal manishie, November 5 @ 5:04 PM (0/0)
- Delighted by the .i submission from Sarnoff rp@1sta.net, November 5 @ 9:57 AM (0/0)
- Support for this application and some suggestions steve smith, November 4 @ 1:06 PM (0/0)
- A powerful structure for ubiquitous personal communications. d_reininger, November 4 @ 12:30 AM (0/0)
- people centric TLD for connecting people - great concept mott, November 3 @ 9:31 PM (0/0)
- MESSAGE simonb, November 3 @ 6:42 PM (1/1)
- Support for .i tld Wendy Suen, November 3 @ 5:57 PM (0/0)
- Great Concept! phillipgb, November 3 @ 5:51 PM (1/1)
- Agreement that .i makes strategic sense for the Internet JNathenson, November 3 @ 1:19 PM (1/1)
- .i proposal from sarnoff jcienski, November 3 @ 1:08 PM (0/0)
- .i Proposal from Sarnoff Corporation. jtodd, November 1 @ 6:09 PM (0/0)
- .i is good for the internet Donovan, November 1 @ 12:18 AM (1/1)
- Help solve the glut of domain names pdesilva, November 1 @ 2:53 AM (0/0)
- New People centric TLD .i ThomasGeorge, October 31 @ 8:54 PM (0/0)
- .geo plus .i = ? adoyle, October 31 @ 8:23 PM (1/1)
- TLD for individuals, an excellent idea. AmitKapoor, October 30 @ 3:22 PM (0/0)
- .i could be my buddy. vpincus, October 30 @ 2:40 PM (0/0)
- .i for the masses. JosephMathew, October 26 @ 4:35 PM (0/0)
- Single character gTLDs are a bad idea mikel5, October 26 @ 1:52 PM (1/3)
- Sounds great, but what about user and community control ? Dom, October 26 @ 8:28 AM (0/0)
- .i proposal peniel, October 26 @ 12:04 AM (0/0)
- What values are envisioned to be associated with .i names? McQuilWP, October 25 @ 8:40 PM (0/0)
- .i proposal works for the developing world shyam, October 24 @ 6:53 AM (0/0)
- Bad idea sjk, October 19 @ 7:44 AM (0/0)
- Proposition to ICANN, Applicants & Internet Community Pistoff, October 18 @ 6:09 PM (0/0)
- Great application and concept huguesdb, October 16 @ 11:32 PM (0/0)
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy