RE: [registrars] John Klensin's view on Single-letter second level domains

[Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't disagree Ross. But a WG is forming, and any debate of this issue
shouldn't get side tracked with irrelevant concerns, like those of
John's. I think you raise a more valid question that the WG perhaps
should answer at the outset. In any event, the RC should be represented
on this WG.


Tim 
 

 -------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [registrars] John Klensin's view on  Single-letter second
level domains
From: Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, January 22, 2007 8:33 am
To: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,  Registrars
Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Tim Ruiz wrote:
> Not advocating anything one way or another, but I don't buy John's concern below:

>From my perspective, I'm less concerned with which set of answers is 
more correct than the other's, rather - I'm more interested in learning 
why the entire Internet community should embroil itself in a debate over

which 26 companies will acquire rights to a single letter .com name.

It seems such a waste of energy to me that we're going down this road at

a time when other higher priority issues such as IDNs are just starting 
to get traction after having languished for so many years. I mean, we've

launched quite a few TLDs over the last few years - I haven't heard of 
any great outcry about the default reserved names rules.

-ross