Re: Comments on Higgs

[Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com>]

On Tue, 26 Nov 1996, Simon Higgs wrote:

> > By placing this categorization
> > scheme inside an iTLD named .MARCA we make it possible for the .MARCA

> This is no different than what is proposed. It is exactly the same
> mapping one level down. A single TLD will have to be shared. With 42
> TLDs, it's possible to distribute them amongst registries until sharing
> protocols become established.

No. By placing this scheme at the root level we use up 41 more iTLD's,
cannot use the category numbers and require IANA to manage the whole
mess. By placing it one level down in .MARCA somebody else will run the
whole thing and if they want to distribute categories to different
registries then they can do this too.

I do not believe that a classification scheme belongs at the root level
because there is no one universal non-overlapping classification scheme
that suits all people. So let us give iTLD's to any competent group who
wishes to implement a classification scheme one level down and let the
market decide.

> Plus, based upon public consumption of .COM @ $100 vs. .US for free,
> any solution solely at the third level has already proven itself to be
> ineffective (read useless).

I don't think so. This only proves that people do not want something for
nothing. In countries like the UK people have paid HIGHER fees than
the Internic charges in order to secure a 3rd level domain name. This
demonstrates that when properly marketed and promoted a 3rd level domain
name is just as desirable (if not more so) than a second level name.


Michael Dillon                   -               ISP & Internet Consulting
Memra Software Inc.              -                  Fax: +1-604-546-3049
http://www.memra.com             -               E-mail: michael@memra.com