Impending (?) entry of gTLD-MoU TLDs into the NSI roots

[Richard Shu <rshu@inetnow.net>]

Dave Crocker was reported to have written:

>>NSI is in an unfortunate position of being faced with open competition by
>>this enhancement and, at the same time, physically holding the master
>>root server to which these new TLDs will be added.  In some circles, having
>>control over a resource which enables the creation of competition for
>>one's organization would be called conflict of interest.

Yes, I agree.  And will the gTLD-MoU POC support the entry of other TLDs
to compete or will it insist on an oligopoly of 83 MoU registries +
NSI?  Where is the open competition that will allow other non-MoU
registries to compete in this market?

>>So there is considerable import to the basis by which NSI chooses to claim 
>>that it can add ISO (national) TLDs (nTLDs) but not add others, namely gTLDs.  
>>As a constructive member of the Internet community, NSI surely wants to makes 
>>its position completely clear, as well as the basis for that position.

And the MoU should make its position completely clear on the entry of
other TLDs into the NSI roots as well as the basis for that position.

>>The moment that is approaching is the result of more than 1 year of open
>>discussion and debate, including many individuals, organizations and
>>countries all over the world.  90 companies are now engaged in producing
>>fully competitive registration services.  

Close, but not quite accurate.  90 companies have put up money to create
software which may or may not work.  They may be building registration
services but they are not yet providing such services as of this date. 
(Oh, except for those that have accepted pre-registrations.)

Also, you cite the discussion and debate in which "many individuals,
organizations and
countries all over the world".  How many of those participants support
the gTLD-MoU?  Was a vote taken?  If so, when was it held and what were
the results?

>>It will do the Internet community no good service to refuse to take a directive 
>>from IANA and thereby create an administrative crisis on the net.

Perhaps IANA's patriarachal ("father knows best") attitude towards
Internet governance is no longer applicable to the global Internet.

Regards,
Richard Shu