RE: [ga] Capture by a Self-interested Faction
- To: "'Danny Younger'" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Karl Auerbach'" <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [ga] Capture by a Self-interested Faction
- From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 08:52:44 +0100
- Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcdhI0MM2Td/cg2tSkWtnsJfUcH+QAAMsGxw
I don't have the cristal ball, therefore I don't know how the Board will
vote the moment that a decision has to be made, but the only thing that I
can say is that Klensin's concern are known to the Board, who will take them
into account (along with all other contributions from either point of view).
As for o'com, I thought it was already reserved by the Irish Registry...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Danny Younger
> Sent: 08 March 2007 02:26
> To: Karl Auerbach
> Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ga] Capture by a Self-interested Faction
> Hi Karl,
> Option #1 is particularly bad, although Chuck Gomes is
> probably salivating at the prospect of auctioning
> single-letter .com and .net names via the new registry
> services process that would necessarily put all auction
> proceeds directly into VeriSign's pockets.
> It's a bad choice because it creates the impression that such
> an offering is in fact a new TLD registry service when in
> reality making a domain such as o.com available for
> registration is identical to the process of making
> available -- there's nothing new about the nature of the
> service being provided; all we're talking about is just
> another string choice within the pool of available names.
> Further, I remain concerned that John Klensin's concerns were
> dismissed by this SubGroup -- see
> Finally, I would ask if IDN registrations could be used to
> readily spoof domains such as O.com.
> No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo!
> Mail for Mobile. Get started.