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

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

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996, Kent Crispin wrote:

I appreciate the constructive feedback given here.  
 
> 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.
> 

Interesting.  Registrars can elect not to support a specific gTLD.  I am a
bit more skeptical about denying a registrar access to a gTLD (would have
to be CORE, though).

> 
> 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", mightstate 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 carrepair 
> wants to get joescarrepair.art no harm is done.

Every person whose first name is Art will love to register here as
Smith.art

> 
> 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 categorizethemselves.
> 
> -- 
> 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
> 

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