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)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    (Belated) Response to Tim Berners-Lee on New TLDs | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 17 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.
    Re:Pointer to my own response from May of this yea
    by Anonymous on Tuesday November 02 2004, @02:34PM (#14416)
    "We know fully well that the domain name system can support litterally millions of top level domains. So even an approach that is conservative upon conservative would allow one new TLD per week. At that rate it would take thousands of years to get to what we know today are technically viable numbers of TLDs."

    The whole point of domain name system is for the benefit of human beings.

    Just because something is technically possible does not automatically make it desirable. The purpose of DNS is to simplify the internet for human beings, after all, machines are happy using raw IP numbers for addressing.

    Unless you are very careful and selective every time you extend the number of top level domains you simply create complexity for users. The kind of opening up you are suggesting will in effect make all the new TLDs irrelevant and simply reinforce the dominance of .com Then you will have exactly the opposite effect of what you are seeking.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Pointer to my own response from May of this yea by Anonymous
    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   1  
    Re:Pointer to my own response from May of this yea
    by Anonymous on Wednesday November 03 2004, @04:31AM (#14417)
    ...who comes up with this stuff??? How does a conservative upon conservative example that is so aggressive that it will never happen always jump straight past "stability" and right to user confusion? No matter how conservative upon conservative the argument for TLD expansion is presented, people have to immediately run to the stability and confusion umbrella...let's not worry about doing any sort of REAL due diligence but instead just throw out the mantra to ad nauseum, over and over...it's ridiculous and this gridlock - based upon stakeholder alliances some of which are hard to fathom but in fact have proven powerful - has measurably harmed the credibility of ICANN in the process...stated missions involving core objectives that are not carried out harm the credibility of an organization...that's what is really simple to understand today and not difficult to predict.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Pointer to my own response from May of this yea
    by KarlAuerbach on Wednesday November 03 2004, @09:14PM (#14419)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    Perhaps many names will confuse you, but is it right for you to impose your own subjective judgement on everyone else? If you can be emperor of the internet then why can't I or why can't Fred down the street?

    The subject nature of your objection contains the seeds of its own failure - the absence of enunciated and reasonbly objective principles that underly your objection render any idea of governance unworkable.

    Going directly to your assertion that adding a new TLD a week will add to confusion - remember that means that by year 2054 we would have less than 3000 total TLDs - In .com there are more than 3000 name changes a day. And nobody is arguing that .com should be shut down because it is confusing.

    In Orwell's 1984 the English language was 'simplified' into NewSpeak - should we reduce the domain name space in the same way in order to reduce confusion. Sould we remove the letter 0 and digit 0 from domain names because they might be considered confusing?

    And if confusion is the metric, then ENUM is certainly a no-starter.

    We do not impose limits on the number of names that one can put on detergent and toothpaste - there is a simple self-corrective force - if people can't remember the name then the product will fail. Similarly, the burden of establishing a memorable name in the domain name system should not be imposed on the DNS itself but rather should be part of the well known job of "building the brand" that has been done by vendors for ages.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    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