[ICANN-EU] Re: Don't waste your endorsement vote

[lutz@iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)]

* Jeff Williams wrote:
>Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
>> * Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>> >>I'm conservative for good reasons. Something to think about: Will shop.de
>> >>withdrawn due to the creation of the TLD shop?
>> >
>> >Why should it?
>> >I don't understand.
>>
>> http://www.denic.de/doc/faq/vergaberichtlinie.html  (cut&waste without tools)
>> Article 2: ... It is not allowed to have second level domain name identical
>>            to any top level domain name (currently arpa, com, ...) ...
>>
>> >>You might read my position as: 'No new TLDs.' This is the correct short
>> >>answer. The longer one is: 'Show me how a new TLD solves a problem over a
>> >>long period of time without creating new ones, and I will not resist.'
>> >
>> >You may be right, new TLDs will not dramatically "solve problems", but
>> >they may improve things.
>>
>> Please give me a hint about possible long term improvments other than
>> increasing profits for more companies.
>
> The improvements are many and varied Lutz as has been discussed time and
> time again on the Domain-Policy list as well as the DNSO list as well.
> But here are just a very few:
>
>1.) More diversity in the name space for various purposes not including
>    commercial ones, such a .LIB for libraries, .sucks for protest sites,
>    union for union organizations and other related areas.

What should that provide? Which problem is solved by those TLDs? Ok, you can
play with impossible projections from the real world into a flat name space
and lose again. But I see no benefit other than the boost of some egos.
That's not the sense of domain names.

>2.) Opens up the name space in DNS for specialized commercial and non
>    commercial domain names.

The DNS is already open for this. Can you explain what is currently
impossible and can be solved by a new TLD?

>3.) Relieves the shortage in the .COM name space.

Every flat space is short. Structure it and it will survive. Adding some new
flat areas only moves the problem to the next decade.

>4.) Improves the robustness of the DNS as a whole.

ROTFL!

New TLDs does not effect the robustness of DNS if we ignore the problems
with ambigous domain names caused by an old error of the resolver lib. If
this error is taken into account, new TLDs decrease the robustness and open
some interesting new attacks to old and new web sites.

If you refer to the diversity of managment, you are right in the way, that
multiple registries does not break together. But it is possible to manage
multiple registries with the existing domain names. If only one registry is
allowed per TLD, then the system can be build more stable than today. But
this would be a regress.

[Questions already answered in this mail deleted]

>>> We may have different business models, different level of protection
>>> of trademarks, different dispute resolution mechanism, and so on.
>>
>> Even org and net had such a policy. How will you prevent the same fate
>> for a new TLD? How will identical trademarks in different countries be
>> handled? How will identical trademarks in the same country but in
>> different categories be handled?
>
> That will be up to the respective countries involved or through
> international treaties to include clauses for this purpose.  But these
> are none the less good questions.  However they have already been
> answered a number of times and in a number of ways.

But no solution known to me solves the problem with external courts. They
are free to ignore all bilateral contracts. And this will cause - in the
long term - the same situation as today.

>> "brand"."class"."ccTLD".trade will hardly be accepted.
>> So you will run into the same problems as today.
>>
>> A new eu domain? Why? eu.int does exist.
>
> eu.int is not a TLD. Hence it is not popular for the purpose it was
> intended for.

I do not see a problem in using eu.int instead of eu. (modulo ego-boosting)

>>> Why should this not be worthed trying?
>>
>> IMHO: The benefits does not overcome the drawbacks.
>
> Of course you are entitled to your opinion.  Unfortunately you are in the
> minority.

I collected a respectable number of votes despite the fact I'm not as
popular as other people and I was not able to answer mail for more than two
weeks. If I keep position three, I'm not on the ballot and my position can
be ignored. But I do not change it in order to get more endorsments. This
would be not fair.

>>> Innovation has been the keyword for Internet. Of course, it is normal
>>> for the innovators of yesterday to become conservative today. But
>>> other innovators will follow ;>)
>>
>> Nobody was able to tell me a good reasoning for doing inventions only
>> with new TLDs.
>
> Than you have not been paying very close attention...

Very possible. I'm not accepting ego-boosters and too idealistic ideas as
arguments, that might be a reason.