RE: [DNS] New 2LD Proposals (to date)

RE: [DNS] New 2LD Proposals (to date)

From: Marty Drill - Nexsta <marty§>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 11:52:48 +1000
auDA is the organisation which makes the decisions about new 2LDs, not
the Registrars.  I think that it would be remiss to suggest that
Registrars want to release new 2LDs in a market that has just had a
'new' 2LD released, the introduction of further 2LD may actually
decrease 'profits' of Registrars. New 2LD will  not have the value of and would therefore be cheaper. Check out who is actually
putting forward the suggestions for new 2LDs.

I think it will be a while off before new 2LDs are introduced. To be
honest, I am against the dilution of the .au space and as a result we
will not be putting forward suggestions for new 2LDs. Let the community
decide, not the registrars.

That said, I think we will see the introduction of new 2LDs at some
point. I concur, if they are to be added, then they must have a reason.



-----Original Message-----
From: Saliya Wimalaratne [mailto:saliya&#167;] 
Sent: Monday, 10 June 2002 11:40 AM
To: dns&#167;
Subject: RE: [DNS] New 2LD Proposals (to date)

On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Skeeve Stevens wrote:

> Well, I think your opinion is wrong.
> Companies and organisations are already confused enough about which
> to join (org vs asn, com vs net (or both)), but adding new ones....
> is that actually supposed to achieve?


This, of course, (while being a *very good* point :) has absolutely
nothing to do with the relative ease (or difficulty) of locating
information on the Internet - which is what i was referring to in your
post (see below). 

Adding more searched resources complicates searches; adding more domains
(without increasing searched resources) does not.

Don't get me wrong; I don't really like the idea of new 2LDs; and one of
the reasons that I don't is the point you made above. That's not the
point as below, though :) Interestingly, the above point is *exactly*
reason that registrars like the idea of new 2LDs.

IMO there's no benefit in adding names for its their own sake.

I think that there *are* benefits to adding new 2LDs; but that those
benefits are not the benefits that are being bandied about. For example
'' is a short, easy-to-remember name that would instantly open up a
whole field of new three-and-four letter domain names to entities.

> > like
> > > ? 
> > They simply
> > > are not needed and only dilute the usefulness of the web for
> > > information.
> > 
> > Skeeve,
> > 
> > Apart from the additional (IMO, negligible) load on DNS servers;
> > varied domain names will make absolutely no different to the
> > difficulty of finding resources using the appropriate search



List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the

author, further information at the above URL.  (324 subscribers.)
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:05 UTC