RE: Thread 2: 60-day issue

[Paul Svensson <paul@svensson.org>]

On Wed, 25 Dec 1996, Carl Oppedahl wrote:

>At 03:29 PM 12/25/96 +0100, David Rosenthal wrote:
>
>>If you sign up for a new domain name before all others and it does not
>>infringe any other's right's, why should anyone else be allowed to opt
>>for that name too? 
>
>There is no reason that someone else should be able to, of course you are
>correct.  What's different is that under the present NSI regime, someone
>else can try to get the domain name taken away from its owner not only
>within 60 days, but any time in the years that follow.  At least the IAHC
>proposal compresses most of the risk into the first 60 days, and allows a
>sigh of relief after the 60 days has expired.

Carl,
Why do you keep bringing the current NSI conflict resolution policy
into the issue of the 60 day hold ?

There's no connection between these two issues;
the flaw with the NSI policy isn't that they don't have hold period,
and adding one wouldn't make their policy work any better;
the gain from the IAHC proposal comes from avoiding the mistake of NSI,
not from adding the 60 day wait.

The IAHC proposal with the 60 day wait should be compared with
the same proposal without the 60 day wait, nothing else.
Bringing the NSI policy into the discussion only serves confusion.

	/Paul