|
Is .nu a bad faith registration?
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 13 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
the country of Niue can sponsor a new application as part of ICANN's upcoming round of "at least 3"...I believe they should be able to qualify as a sponsor: .NIUE
It seems to me that any country should be able to meet ICANN's sponsorship requirements for a new, restricted TLD given they are not already the designated adminstrator of their 2 letter country code.
No?
Ray
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re:There's not much to argue
by RFassett
|
| Starting Score: |
3 |
points |
| Extra 'Insightful' Modifier |
|
0 |
|
| Total Score: |
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
Ray, what's wrong with you? Don't you understand that creating artificial scarcity and then inserting yourself into a position to decide who gets what is what ICANN, ITU and similar organizations are all about? ;-)
Your solution seems rational and obvious, but if everyone involved in DNS was interested in
rationality and simple forms of coordination what fun would that be?
Next thing you'll be suggesting that there's no inherent conflict between the AT&T Corporation (which holds att.com) and the American Talmud and Torah Society (which holds att.org). Wouldn't you rather give them both knives and kickboxing outfits and see who wins in the ring?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
It seems to me that any country should be able to meet ICANN's sponsorship requirements for a new, restricted TLD given they are not already the designated adminstrator of their 2 letter country code.
you have it backwards. any ccTLD admin or country that wants to create a new TLD should be able to do so, on whatever terms it wants -- and ICANN's job should be to (a) point out potential collisions ('coordinate'), and (b) rubberstamp it. it'd be nice if it was a 3-letter ISO code, but ICANN disregarded such aesthetic-technical concerns with .museum and its 4-letter ilk.
the idea that nations are subordinate to ICANN is flat-out ludicrous.
cheers,
t
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
You seem to miss the point that the issue here (as Karl correctly points out) is not about a two letter string, but about which kind of sovereignty a country has over the Internet. Does that "digital sovereignty" include the "property" of a TLD - possibly identified by the two letter ISO code - or not?
If not, this means that an independent nation depends on the US government to get its own specific branch of the DNS (Email, WWW...) tree - something that nobody outside the US is ever going to accept, especially in the present international climate.
--vb. (Vittorio Bertola)
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
