Re: [DNS] Cost

Re: [DNS] Cost

From: David Keegel <djk§>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 23:52:19 +1000 (EST)
] >The biggest pressure I can see for this year is that at least one
] >monopoly commercial DNA will likely be requesting/demanding in a
] >few months time, that registrants pay significant amounts of money
] >just to continue holding their domains.
] Whilst there may be some perceived advantage to registering in the
] domain, the .com is easier to deal with, cheaper, and quicker.  

I'm not talking about new registrations in this thread, I'm talking
about existing domain names (those more than 1.5 years old now).

Changing domain names is a very considerable pain which means there
is strong pressure to keep the same domain name you had before.
If I had been talking about new registrations, then the fact that its
hard to find an unallocated name that you want in com would have been

For anyone who asks "what's wrong with .com?", I invite you to find
a table of the percentage of 2/3/4/5-letter .com domains available
and compare that with domains available.  I won't be at all
surprised when you find there are *much* fewer .com domains left.

If DNS is like real estate, then the com gTLD feels "over-crowded".

] Do we really want a system that is either that difficulty to deal with in
] terms of red tape, or expensive that the domain is just by passed?

I certainly want to see the cost of domains reduced (particularly
renewals).  That's why I wrote the paragraph at the top of this message.
 David Keegel <djk&#167;>  URL:
Cybersource P/L: Unix Systems Administration and TCP/IP network management
Received on Wed Jul 14 1999 - 21:52:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC