North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical


  • From: Jordan Mendelson
  • Date: Tue Apr 22 12:52:58 1997

On Tue, 22 Apr 1997, Joseph T. Klein wrote:

> Keep the agencies of the United States government out of this.
> This sounds like NSI is trying to wiggle out of participation in
> CORE. NSI does not like a solution that provides no guarantee that
> NSI will be one of the new registries.

[once again, for all those people who want to stop reading about iahc,
nsi, internic, iana, or anything that deals with alternate registrations,
hit 'd' now]

Well lets see why they would do this;

If NSI no longer provides registration services for the Internet for a
number of tlds, the need for NSI goes down. When the need for NSI goes
down, the amount of money they make goes down, which leads to downsizing
and loss of jobs as well as decreased speed in registrations.

Has anyone botherered to look how many people it takes to handle
registrations, deletions, management of systems, programming, etc? Now,
lets think about this. What happened when InterNIC *first* started
providing domain registrations? It was pure hell. Registrations took
forever. They went through a few different database formats, software
changes all the time, you couldn't get them on the phone, etc etc.

It took THIS long to get InterNIC to where they are today, and now we want
to shove in 28 new ones? And each one of these 28 new ones is going to try
and add domains to each of the 7 new tlds? We are going to start seeing
legal hassles like nothing else. "I sent in my registration for my.firm at
3:32 PST to yyy registrations. Well, I sent mine in at 7:15 EST for it to
zzz registrations, but they processed mine first, so I get it".

Personally, I think that the new TLD's are good, though I would personally
cut out ones such as .nom because that is just going to cause legal
problems about who owns smith.nom, etc, but I don't think new registrars
should be added. InterNIC should be it, one company providing this sort of
thing is a hell of a lot more powerful than 20 little ones.

> If you agree with the IAHC solution then show your support 
> and advocate that your company sign the MoU.

You know, someone should really make an alternate proposal and see how
many people sign for that or at least some sort of survey.

Giving the people only one choice doesn't really prove anything.


Jordan Mendelson     :
Web Services, Inc.   :

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -