Richard Sexton wrote:
> At 08:21 PM 6/22/99 +0200, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> >Richard Sexton wrote:
> >
> >> The one difference, and it's a *significant* difference, is, CORE would
> >> like to see only it's TLDS added to the root, whereas "our camp" would
> >> like to see CORES's and all the other ones added and the users
> >> can vote with it's wallets in a true free market.
> >>
> >What makes you say that CORE wants to see *only* its gTLDs added to the
> >root?
>
> Years of debate ?
>
> It's very easy to disspell this notion.
>
> All CORE has to do is say "we believe our model is best for everybody,
> but we have an open mind and wuld like to see all TLDS currently oeprating
> added to the root and be given a chance, and the free market will either
> prove or disspel out hypothesis".
>
IMHO, there are a lot of possible intermediate solutions between "add only
my TLDs" and "add every possible TLD".
I cannot speak for CORE, but for what I know its position is neither of the
two extremes you give as alternatives.
In fact, we recognize the authority of ICANN, and we assume that, as there
are accredited Registrars, there will be accredited Registries, and gTLDs
will be allocated to these (accredited) Registries following a method to be
determined.
I assume that the DNSO will provide a recommendation in this sense. In fact,
a working group on new gTLDs is already being formed.
Regards
Roberto
