Re: FCFS and prior use

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@imc.org>]

>> 	I'd be interested in seeing some explanation for, and discussion
>> of, the reason the first come/first served is necessarily the assignment
>> scheme that must be used.
>
>Because you recognized the over 100 existing cases in which that assertion
>is currently operative (COM/NET/ORG/EDU/ISO-codes)

	While FCFS applied to a number of the current registrars, it has
NOT applied to a number of others.

>> 	Similarly, what is the basis for claiming that those active in what
>> is being called "prior use" must be factored in to the specification.
>
>For the identical reason as the above.

	The com/net/org/edu//iso-codes set derives from IANA processes, as
have some others.  Should those deriving from independent or uncoordinated
processes also be included?  If so, why?  If not, how do we discrimate
between those to include and those not to include?

d/


(read the last line, please)
----------------------------
Dave Crocker, Director                                       +1 408 246 8253
Internet Mail Consortium                                 (f) +1 408 249 6205
127 Segré Place                                             dcrocker@imc.org
Santa Cruz, CA  95060 USA                                 http://www.imc.org

Also:  IAHC member, expressing strictly (or loosely) personal opinions