North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: new.net: yet another dns namespace overlay play
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 02:51:31PM -0800, Mike Batchelor wrote: > > > I'm pretty sure that I didn't want it to come to this, and I'm > > not entirely > > convinced that anyone should be doing it. But personal > > reservations aside, > > its happening. And I intend to see that its done as well as possible. > > Then why did you and David ignore my plea to cooperate with the extant TLD > managers, with whom the new.net TLDs now collide? You could have launched > the new.net TLDs with a bunch of in-place registrants already hosting sites > under the TLDs you have collided with. You could have built a shared > registration system that could have encompassed all the non-ICANN TLDs, and > helped create something that would have really given serious challenge to > ICANN. But instead, you chose to ignore me, and the others. Now we have a > mess on our hands, for example, who is really the registrant of > warren.family, the one who has held the Pacificroot warren.family for 4 > years, or the one who just got warren.family from new.net on Monday? But if they had done the net-friendly thing (created a partnership/coalition/whatever with existing alternate roots), that would have.. been the net-friendly thing. Sure they could have done this, instantly strengthened their position, and maybe created a serious enough force that ICANN may have felt it and reacted intelligently. As it is they're just another alternative root, albeit with more $$ than most. Will they survive? maybe. Given the fate of similar idealab! creations it's certainly not a statistical probability. ... Of course, who are we to challenge new.net, with their patent-pending technology for appending ".new.net." to hostnames, leading partnerships with exciting companies like earthlink! and they exist to a whopping 16 million users, are easily accessed by everyone else willing to fiddle with their resolver (well, not mail, sorry we need to invent a sendmail plugin for that one). Besides, nothing that ever came out of palo alto and was spun up by a "think tank" with an exclamation mark appended to their name ever went wrong, right? Last I checked guesstimates of internet users globally was something like 400 million people, ~30% were in north america, ~25% in europe, ~20% in asia/oceania, ~10% in south america. Maybe these figures seem high, but remember that only a considerable subset will be regular [ab]users. 16 million, probably an aggressive figure to start with, any way you look at it, nothing but a drop in the bucket. aaron: when you guys end up on fuckedcompany, can I get a deal on some of that nice hardware you [probably] have over there? Maybe a terabyte disk farm, or a highend server (I'll pay shipping). cheers, - wolfie. -- Brian Russo <[email protected]> Debian/GNU Linux <[email protected]> http://www.debian.org LPSG "member" <[email protected]> http://www.lpsg.org -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|