ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    gTLDs hoping to enter the legacy root When Industry Giants Propose New TLDs
    posted by michael on Thursday March 11 2004, @03:51PM

    Jules Vo-Dinh writes "Some of the biggest names in the mobile communications industry (Microsoft, Nokia, Vodafone, HP, Orange, Sun...) are banding together to create a new gTLDs for Web pages built specifically for access by mobile devices..."
    and
    AF writes "It might be a glance at where some of the new domain names may be headed. In a recent press release, Alan Harper says: 'The aim of the initiative is to accelerate the rollout of Internet products and services specifically designed for mobile devices as well as to ensure far greater operating simplicity for mobile subscribers across the globe. This venture should build on the considerable trust that exists in the mobile community between subscribers and operators.'"



    "What is this initiative you ask? A new wireless protocol? A new wireless association? Not exactly! Alan Harper is the group strategy director at Vodafone, one the world's largest mobile telecom operators and he is talking about a recent bid to ICANN for a new unspecified mobile top-level domain. That's right a "mobile TLD" or mTLD. Nine software, telecom, and mobile handset heavyweights (3, GSM Association, HP, Microsoft, Nokia, Orange, Samsung, Sun, and Vodafone) have signed a memorandum of understanding to jointly set up a new Internet names registry company to issue domain names for wireless devices, in an attempt to boost mobile services..."

     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
      Related Links  
    · CircleID
    · ICANN
    · Vodafone
    · 3
    · GSM Association
    · HP
    · Microsoft
    · Nokia
    · Orange
    · Samsung
    · Sun
    · Jules Vo-Dinh
    · banding together
    · may be headed
    · More gTLDs hoping to enter the legacy root stories
    · Also by michael
     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    When Industry Giants Propose New TLDs | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 6 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Is this really needed?
    by dtobias (dan@tobias.name) on Friday March 12 2004, @07:08AM (#13175)
    User #2967 Info | http://domains.dan.info/
    I don't really see the point in having separate TLDs for different protocols, data formats, and so on... that's the sort of thing that's already got perfectly good methods of communication not involving different TLDs. For example, there are longstanding traditions of using hostnames under a domain to represent different protocols or purposes, like 'www' for a Web server, 'ftp' for an FTP server, 'news' for an NNTP server, etc. (e.g., "www.example.net", "ftp.example.net"). "wap.example.net" is a format in wide use for mobile-specific sites using the WAP protocl and WML data format.

    Also, HTTP's format negotiation features permit HTML and WML to coexist at the same URI, with the appropriate format sent depending on the user agent.

    Having the TLD indicate the media type would seem to be putting this information at the wrong level of the logical structure. Existing TLDs like .com, .edu, etc., designate types of entities owning the site (commercial, educational, etc.), not the type of protocol used by them... all sorts of different protocols coexist on these domains.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com