Re: Thread 5: Defining the namespace (was Re: Thread 1:

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

Hank Nussbacher allegedly said:

[...]

> I would assume some sort of gTLD charter would have to be written so that
> everyone knows what belongs in each gTLD.  But how do you enforce it?  What
> is to stop a news agency from wanting to register a .net SLD?  Or should we
> ignore that entirely and just hope that everyone opens a SLD in the proper
> place?  By using very generic gTLDs like .inet and .iway we eliminate that
> problem.  Which is better?  I'd like to hear opinions on this matter.

If we back up a bit, then it isn't necessary to make a choice as to 
which is better, because both approaches can be accomodated.  To do 
that there are a few assumptions:

1) each TLD has a charter.

2) the gTLDs as a group all share the same charter, the "gTLD
charter".  This charter would specify that generic TLDs are, in your
words, very generic, and no attempt is made to discriminate SLD
applicants by any criteria. 

3) there are other TLDs that have different charters from the gTLD 
charter.  In particular, the list derived from the Yahoo categories 
might be called the "classified TLDs".  There could be other kinds of 
TLDs as well, but I won't discuss them.

4) registrars are required by the MoU they sign to enforce the 
charters for all TLDs for which they accept registrations.

5) all TLDs are shared, but a registrar may elect *not* to accept 
registrations for a particular TLD because the registrar didn't feel 
it could enforce the charter.  Furthermore, a registrar may be 
*denied* the right to register in a particular, if it is determined 
that they are not doing a "reasonable" job of enforcing the charter.


A poorly structured charter would be very difficult to enforce. 
Furthermore, some conditions are intrinsically difficult to enforce. 
Therefore, charters need to be carefully thought through, and are very
carefully worded documents, especially when it comes to specifying
enforcement.  So, for example, the charter for the .art TLD, a
"classified TLD", might state something like:

	"The .art TLD is intended for organizations that are
	one way or another involved in the arts: [Long list of 
	appropriate categories of organizations].  Registrars
	for this TLD are will attempt to verify that the organization 
	exists and actually is involved in the arts.  Given the 
	flexible nature of "art", enforcement of this charter is 
	at the "reasonable effort on the part of the registry" 
	level."

For this TLD enforcement is not a major issue -- if Joe's car repair 
wants to get joescarrepair.art no harm is done.

On the other hand, the charter for .law might require that the registrar
obtain documentation from applicants verifying the connection to the 
legal profession, and the registrar might be required to keep that 
documentation on file.  Many registrars might not care to go to that 
level of effort, and the registrars that did might charge more for 
the service.

In general, I think most enforcement would be at the "reasonable 
effort" level.  If the names are well chosen (and the yahoo names do 
seem fairly reasonable), most users would see the advantage of being 
correctly categorized, and registrars web pages would contain helpful 
information for new customers helping them categorize themselves.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com,kc@llnl.gov		the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E  87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F