Discuss mailing list

[Brian Koontz <brian AT opennicproject.org>]

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 11:07:41AM +0000, Richard Lyons wrote:
> Seems to me what is needed is a united open database of tlds in which a
> tld can only bcome active when signed off by, say, 75% of collaborating
> NICs.  They would have to appoint a representative with signing rights.
> The only common policies needed would be arrangements to prevent
> squatting.  Having a majority rather than a unanimous vote would
> probably avoid spoiling behaviour (by which I mean one NIC arbitrarily
> blocking the tlds of another).  The open database could be mirrored by
> servers nominated by each participating NIC, using some kind of
> distributed management script, I guess.

There are altroots whose aims are incompatible with OpenNIC (for
instance, new.net has some rather draconian policies).  Other altroots
we have tried to work with in the past, but have not been successful.

It's simply not as easy as you posit, because the altroots all have
different aims.  And I certainly don't believe that OpenNIC's gTLDs
should be approved or disapproved by a group with members whose goals
are different from those of OpenNIC.

I'm all for dialog.  I wish someone would contact new-nations.com and
set up a peering agreement with them...it looks like they're giving a
voice to people who currently don't have a voice on the Internet.  I
would do it, but I don't have the time ATM.

But having OpenNIC fall under an umbrella organization that has the
ability to dictate how OpenNIC operates?  That's rather distasteful to
me.  

  --Brian


-- 
OpenNIC (the sequel) co-founder and wikimaster
IRC: Freenode.net channel #opennic