On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:16:56 -0700 (PDT), Greg Skinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>William X. Walsh wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 16:22:20 -0700 (PDT), Greg Skinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>
>> >Of course lots of people believe this, but is this ICANN's fault, and
>> >does adding lots of new TLDs to the IANA root correct this behavior?
>
>> >When the new registrars were announced, there were all sorts of
>> >complaints (including some from the alternative TLD crowd) demanding
>> >to know why those companies were chosen. Why would the situation
>> >with .per, .web, or any of the others be any different?
>
>> So because something will cause some controversy we avoid doing it?
>
>> Come on, this circular logic is nauseating.
>
>Perhaps you should try answering my question.
>
>I'll do you the courtesy of answering your question. ICANN is already
>in the midst of controversy. IMHO, it is wise of them to defer
>consideration of new TLDs at this time.
No one, least of all me, is saying add them NOW. But the time frame
and structure that will be used (as Esther has eluded to in the past)
is absolutely insane.
And besides this whole thing was not about whether ICANN should
introduce new gTLDs right now, but whether two management models can
and should coexist for new registries.
--
William X. Walsh
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax:(209) 671-7934
"The fact is that domain names are new and have unique
characteristics, and their status under the law is not yet clear."
--Kent Crispin (June 29th, 1999)
