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

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    Salon interviews John Gilmore | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 36 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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.
    by fnord (reversethis-{moc.oohay} {ta} {k2yorg}) on Wednesday July 03 2002, @04:04AM (#7587)
    User #2810 Info
    Then how do many ccTLDs manage with a few thousand registrants? -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Umm by fnord
    Re: Umm
    by RFassett on Wednesday July 03 2002, @06:04AM (#7591)
    User #3226 Info | http://www.enum.info
    agreed, competition can be cruel....without it, we have seen just how well the consumer has been represented in the TLD sprectrum. Exactly where is this accountability to the consumer at the registry level? Verisign and their delete procedures? Afilias with their LR1, LR2 etc etc? Neulevel and their .biz lottery scheme? They each get away with this stuff because alternative options do not exist for the consumer nor is there a plan in place to allow for it. Funny how after years and years Verisign is motivated to clean-up their delete procedures upon new registries to the market place...think they would be otherwise? (note that Verisign argues they should be allowed to offer ancillary services like WLS because of the existence of competition) It's really not rocket science yet people continue to want to argue that domain name addressing is a point of failure thus entirely absolved of basic market competitive practices. Pointing to how registries are today also more accountable to consumers as support vs. otherwise is quite a stretch of logic. Maybe there should exist only one or two ISP's for the world as this is certainly a potential point of failure for any given Internet consumer at any given time. I now, domain addressing is "different"...sure.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Umm
    by fnord (reversethis-{moc.oohay} {ta} {k2yorg}) on Wednesday July 03 2002, @06:59AM (#7598)
    User #2810 Info
    Many ccTLDs are, or were, run via universities, so government funding was often indirect. Yes, often they operate(d) at a loss but not much of a loss, depending partly on volunteers and already existing infrastructure. That was often with the names being provided free of charge, so the cost wasn't that great, universities don't have $millions to run a registry. That was my point, it needn't be massively expensive to run a functional registry.

    It was a workable model for quite a long time and nothing major has changed over that period in terms of running a registry except that the demand for ccTLD names has often increased beyond the capacity of a university to manage it. This has less to do with an inability of the hardware and software to scale, and more with requiring additional personnel.

    So fine, new rTLDs may have to start small and grow as necessary. If they had a variable pricing structure this would help. That is, as there would be some names most in demand and as those would likely be the first to go, then price them accordingly. Perhaps auction them off. Using my example from elsewhere I'd pay $100/yr. for fnord.books. But I'd probably pay much more than that for rare.books. Thus the registry gets a jumpstart in funding early on.

    I wouldn't point to .tv as an example of how to do this though. They had investment funding, including from VeriSign (who has since bought them), so at one point they had over 85 employees and very fancy digs. That's the typical 20th century dotcom pie in the sky model which is now thoroughly discredited, so that is hardly a model to point to, even if it was successful. Seems more grounded in fundamental business practices to me to start small and scale as necessary.

    As for IOD or new.net (or anyone, I don't know why you picked those two) being given a registry and failing, that is why ICANN has, or should have, contingency plans in place, including escrowed data. ICANN can then offer the registry for bids as they are now doing with .org. The only doomsday scenario is if there are no takers, and if the market has gotten that bad, that will be the least of our worries. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Umm
    by isquat on Thursday July 04 2002, @08:40AM (#7639)
    User #3363 Info | http://i.squ.at/
    Operating a registry with 5 domains I will do for you for $25 a year.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply 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