[142060] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John LeCoque)
Fri Jun 17 17:48:51 2011
In-Reply-To: <4DFBCAA7.6000800@paulgraydon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:48:43 -0500
From: John LeCoque <jleq96@gmail.com>
To: Paul Graydon <paul@paulgraydon.co.uk>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
If ICANN continues this stupidity, perhaps it will finally be feasible for
an alternate DNS root to gain a following? Although that would lead to a
fractured DNS system, which really isn't in the best interests of anybody.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Paul Graydon <paul@paulgraydon.co.uk>wrote:
> On 06/17/2011 11:33 AM, David Conrad wrote:
>
>> On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>>
>>> http://tech.slashdot.org/**story/11/06/17/202245/<http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/06/17/202245/>
>>>>>
>>>> You just learned about this now?
>>>>
>>> In fact I did. I certainly haven't seen it mentioned on NANOG in the
>>> last 6
>>> months or so; where should I have seen it?
>>>
>> New TLDs have been discussed now for over a decade. Press (both technical
>> and popular) on ICANN activities have ratcheted up significantly recently,
>> particularly with the approval of .XXX (which was recently discussed here on
>> NANOG: http://mailman.nanog.org/**pipermail/nanog/2011-March/**
>> 034488.html<http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2011-March/034488.html>).
>> Not blaming/accusing, just surprised this would be a surprise. I guess I've
>> been living in the layer9 cloud too long....
>>
>> Regards,
>> -drc
>>
> I've seen the stuff about adding a few extra TLDs, like XXX. I haven't
> seen any references until now of them considering doing it on a commercial
> basis. I don't mind new TLDs, but company ones are crazy and going to lead
> to a confusing and messy internet.
>
> Paul
>
>
