Re: A question about protocol

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 5:17 AM +0000 12/24/96, Jeff Williams wrote:

> > > Chris, I do not agree that we have come to a consensus on the Shared
> > > registry idea at all.  Let's take a vote here on this issue?
> > >
> > > For Shared- Registry Yes ___   No ___
> > >
> >
> > It's not black and white. The IAHC pretends it is, but it's not.
> > Sharing is appropriate for some TLDs, and is not appropriate for
> > others. These create  divisions within the iTLDs, pTLDs, and ISO-3166
> > TLDs.
>
>   I am aware that it is not a black and whit issue.  Your point that
> IAHC is trying to portray it as a black and white issue, I am not
> sure that I agree with.  My point is to make the argument a bit
> simpeler from on point of view.  I understand that for some
> TLDs it is approiate that they be sharable.  I do not argue that.
> My argument is that that decision should be left up to the
> holders of those TLDs, under advisement, but not in a dictatorial
> manner, as to weather they wish to share them in some fassion.
>

That's an oxymoron. How can the registries holding a shared TLD decide
that it's exclusive? Why would an exclusive registry give up it's
monopoly?

This is why the TLD charter is critical, because it spells out exactly
how the TLD will be administrated.


Simon

--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.