Re: Conflict resolution?

["David R. Conrad" <davidc@apnic.net>]

>The important idea is that *all* iTLD delegations from the IANA (or
>whoever) are non-exclusive.  This would get us away from the corrosive
>idea that iTLDs are "hot properties".

I'd just like to strongly support what Kent has said here -- it would
seem to me that a large majority of the "discussions" over the
creation of new domains could be resolved by simply making the
following statement:

_ALL_ top level domains _MUST_ be shared

This would:

- remove of the current .COM/.NET/.ORG monopoly, thereby alleviating
  what I see as _the_ major area of contention
- handle the issue of "squatter's rights" and whether or not the
  IANA accepted applications
- allow for the creation of new TLDs to relieve the pressure on
  .COM, but doing so in a much less "charged" environment 

The IAHC's role would then devolve into simply approving new TLDs
based on perceived "usefulness to the Internet at large" as opposed to
trying to establish viability of business plans (heh, good luck.  Hope
your all's liability insurance premiums are paid up).

The arguments against the shared-tld proposals seem to fall into 2
categories:

a) they don't know how it can be done

b) they wouldn't be able to make money

Argument a) can be answered by simply pointing at the way the 800
numbers are handled in the US, that is, a neutral third party operates
a "mutual exclusion service" handling requests FCFS via some
(presumably) highly automated procedure.

As for argument b), I fail to see this as a major concern.  Enabling
profit out of monopoly status wouldn't appear to be a goal to me.  The
viability of any organization offering domain name allocation services
should be dependent upon how good a service they offer, not that they
got their request for a TLD in before the half million other people
who came up with the same TLD name.

Regards,
-drc