<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Can live without .pro
- To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [ga] Can live without .pro
- From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:50:52 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=0nfNIStluIGqqsApGPOODPD1Gqp7r6ibtnlWmuBgF5pVKlJrvIsDonicEZsu7M4nqVEMUsxpnYS0TWT2p2sNvh5CfLKQpbeV5O3HpbQGGbzkpb47BumvdmLazoLE9gknp7lZTEdpzxrVkOUrjk6ZtXzvgoepmQwqO3U8Fe5SLkU= ;
- In-reply-to: <20060829173838.94412.qmail@web50010.mail.yahoo.com>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
George wrote: "In the event that the registry is a
"failure", there should be a mechanism in the contract
to permit ICANN to delete the TLD from the root in the
future"
When I look at the .pro operation, I see a TLD that
has so far been sponsored by two different
organizations (first the folks at RegistryPro --
actually the register.com registry team -- and later
the Hostway people). The TLD has very very few
registrations (although a large and dubious chunk is
attributable to the efforts of EnCirca).
Should this TLD be deemed a failure and retired, or
should the contract be rebid with yet another operator
given an opportunity to make a go of it?
Knowing ICANN [sigh], this TLD will probably be resold
again without any public input into the process.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|