North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain
- From: Jim Popovitch
- Date: Fri May 12 14:42:07 2006
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=a7bnn2+6ywAP2pGYsVRpwJlLPVxbMF7ZwTRmx0bpgrjYcvE9UC+ZnfUPG5OV2vFGuB+shUara34HxzsBN6FlE7SAjnE1FAhMMQtIHy12z1HY74DviH9oLxvTQ8efl3JYja2+GQ5U9I0ErMqwZcxvpbIHiOmcVmYLe7WuA/OrO5Q= ;
Steve Gibbard wrote:
Elimination of TLDs would in no way mandate that people register domains
from one global entity. Today we have multiple entities registering
domains back to multiple authorities, why not just have one authority
and allow for multiple regional registrars. TLDs just add confusion to
everything, and add complexity to the back-end.
Note that there are a lot more TLDs than just .COM, .NET, .ORG, etc.
The vast majority of them are geographical rather than divided based on
organizational function. For large portions of the world, the local TLD
allows domain holders to get a domain paid for in local currency, for a
price that's locally affordable, with local DNS servers for the TLD.
For gTLDs they'd have to pay in US dollars, at prices that are set for
Americans, and have them served far away on the other ends of expensive
and flaky International transit connections.
Perhaps there is a better list to move this discussion to, if someone
would point me in that direction I would be glad to check it out.