[governance] RE: GeoTLD

[Karl Auerbach]

Milton L Mueller wrote:

> All decisions about what TLDs exist _do_ have to be made at the
> global level.

Not really.  (By-the-way, it may be a bit ironic to consider the 
relative sizes and recognition between the city in which you live, 
Syracuse, New York, as compared to its classic namesake - between the 
two, which might have a better claim to TLD status?)

But back to why we do not need a singular global body to make choices 
about TLDs:

If we accept the proposition that there can be multiple root systems, 
each with its suite of TLD offerings, then the choice becomes one made 
by the users of the internet rather than by some singular overlord of names.

As I have described previously, there is nothing in internet technology 
that prevents multiple roots.  In fact the end-to-end principle requires 
that the possibility exist.

Any root that offers a suite of TLDs would be crazy to offer a suite 
that does not include the familiar core TLDs - the ones we now get from 
NTIA/ICANN.  Any root that offers something inconsistent with that will 
shortly find its way into the trash heap of internet failures.

In that way, the folks proposing .berlin could go to various root zone 
composers and say "Please put us into your root zone", just as they are 
now asking ICANN to put .berlin into the ICANN/NTIA root zone.

Perhaps they will do it way that ICANN likes - mountains of paper about 
business plans and payment of big evaluation fees.  Perhaps some root 
zone compositors will be more forthright and simply say "just pay us a 
percentage of your revenue", other might simply say "we like you, so OK".

That then allows internet users to make the choice whether .berlin 
floats or sinks - by choosing those root zone providers that offer 
.berlin, and, of course, buying names in .berlin.

In most of the world a new brand of laundry detergent does not apply to 
the Worldwide Ministry of Soap for approval.  That kind of idea was 
tried in numerous 5-year plans in the old USSR and nobody has ever said 
that that was a system that was responsive to user needs.

Rather, a new brand of laundry detergent must fight to build its brand 
(name recognition) and obtain space on the shelves of stores.

There is no reason why TLD creation must occur using the model of a 
top-down planned economy (the ICANN method) rather than a competitive 
economy in which user choice ultimately determines success and failure.

(On the original issue - the elevation of geographic places TLD status - 
perhaps we ought to take the ENUM idea, but use LAT/LONG coordinates 
instead - so the domain name 50.30.N.13.25.E.geo - would map to a NAPTR 
record that could produce URI's relating to Berlin.  - I believe that 
was part of the idea of the .iii proposal that ICANN put on hold in year 
2000.)

Such a geographic coordinate based system - or simply nesting cities 
within their country codes - would certainly make a lot more sense than 
elevating city names to TLD's - has anybody counted the number of cities 
named "Los Angeles" that exist around the world.  Even my own city of 
Santa Cruz finds its name replicated a hundredfold and more in Spanish 
and French names around the world.

		--karl--

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance