Re: A question about protocol

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Simon,

  I agree.  I think that Registrars, should have some say so in what
those "Rules" in the charter are, that's all.

Regards,


Simon Higgs wrote:
> 
> 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.

-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. 
Phone :972-447-1878
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com