Re: What is a registry selling?

[Christopher Ambler <chris@iodesign.com>]

> While mechanically useful (and intended) for the simple task of
> name/address mapping, there is a separate question about the value-added
> import of iTLDs.  Are they, in fact, resources that can or should be
> "developed"?  The reference to marketing effort for specific iTLD strings
> suggests that you see some iTLDs strings as very much subject to brand
> equity development.  By using such a term, I'm trying to make clear that it
> is easily possible to view iTLDs (or any other string) in that fashion.
> The question, then, is whether an iTLD enhancement scheme should
> explicitly enourage or discourage such a view, or whether it should pretty
> much ignore that view and let other factors dominate?

I would say ignore it. It's a valid observation, and I believe that iTLDs are,
in fact, subject to development, but that's a question that the market will
decide. If registries can develop them as such, why curtail it?

> 	The view you espouse is one of resource development, where the
> resource is the iTLD string.  An entirely different view is one simply of
> service.  One may view registries as, well, registries.  They need to
> process information, be responsive to problems, provide reliable data
> management and access, etc.  Their worth, therefore, is in service quality
> and not the particular strings they happen to service.

I would maintain that their worth is in both. Without the service quality,
the registry (and the iTLDs selected) are worthless. But some iTLDs are
subject to value-added development. Our plans with .WEB include offering
DNS services (A records), which could be done with any iTLD and would fall
under the broadest definition of service. We plan, however, to also market
.WEB as "World Wide Web Addresses," and provide a search engine closely
tied with the domains. This is a development of the "property" that we feel
is closely tied to our choice of iTLD.

> 	What's wrong with this other view?  Is there a third or fourth view
> that will help determine the valid role of a registry?

I can't think of any other views than the two you've brought up. My point,
however, is that this is a question that I don't feel the IAHC should have
to decide. Allow registries to select the iTLDs they want to serve, acknowledge
that the choice of iTLD *may* have an impact on development and marketing,
and see if that happens. If it does not, the the registries will most likely
migrate to a shared model, as it may work better.

But at *this point,* doing anything else will most likely result in those
registries with pending applications and perceived ("perceived" in order to
avoid yet another argument) guarantees from IANA to feel that they have been
wronged - opening up a can of very hungry worms.




--
Christopher Ambler
President, Image Online Design, Inc.