Re: Indepent view of the draft

[Hank Nussbacher <hank@ibm.net.il>]

On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Joseph J. Kim wrote:

The entire global dispersion is only for the INITIAL allocation.  As soon
as NSI joins CORE and shares com/net/org then we can have another 200 
registrars in North America, for example.

> 
> 
> On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Stephen Harris wrote:
> 
> > "Registrars allocated equally to each of the six ITU designated geographical
> > world zones".  Why?  The Internet is global, but it is not equal; some
> > locations have better connectivity than others, and may be better suited
> > for registries.  Geographical distribution is a bad idea.
> 
> Not really.  The amount of money generated by registrations should make
> equality a reality fairly quickly.  As you say the Internet is global and the
> geographic dispersion of registries should reflect that.  This may seem like
> Internet affirmative action, but I believe the long term view should be
> considered more than the short term, current situation.
> 
> -jjk
> 
> 

Hank Nussbacher
IAHC member
[the views expressed above belong to the author and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the other IAHC members]