Re: Shared vs. Exclusive

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

Hank Nussbacher allegedly said:
> 
> > 
> > Why?  You have only said that work remains to be done for shared and
> > that therefore we need exclusive immediately.  You are assumingan
> > immediate need for iTLD's without giving a reason.  What's the rush?
> 
> People want an alternative to NSI which is today amonopoly. Based on
> mail on various lists I would say that the pressure is there.  It is
> not my imagination.

Pressure is not an issue.  Single licenses for shared TLDs can be granted 
immediately, with the provision that they must support any sharing 
protocol approved as an RFC by the IETF.  Furthermore, groups that 
wanted to do ad hoc cooperative management of a shared TLD could do 
so without any RFC -- for low volume TLDs, elaborate protocols are 
unnecessary.

Granting shared licenses imediately would provide a strong incentive 
to get a sharing protocol developed, incidentally.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com,kc@llnl.gov		the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B6 04 CC 30 9E DE CD FE  6A 04 90 BB 26 77 4A 5E