Discuss mailing list

["John Kozlowski \(ShofarDomain.com\)" <John.Kozlowski AT ShofarDomain.com>]

Thank you for being a bit more clear.  You touch on the ownership versus rental model.  I don’t know if you have any criticisms of the rootless TLD which is the fundamental issue.

 

As to ownership versus rental, this is simply our choice for our TLDs.  It is not a requirement for all TLDs.  The fact that Namecoin has not been as successful as ICANN is not due to any semblance of the ownership model.  Bitcoin is a lightning rod when it comes to any business model.

 

The concern that an SLD may become unavailable because someone lost their key is minor compared to the advantages, especially with the plethora of TLDs becoming available.  We could elaborate on that, but this is a distraction.

 

The fundamental is the rootless technology.  With it numerous players can come to the table with differing objectives and business models and have an equal footing.  Alternative roots, are still roots and a central controlling agent.  We need autonomous TLDs, or as we saw in Dubai last December, the UN will take over ICANN and will become the sole final authority on who gets what domain.  I’d rather not go there, and rootless TLD will thwart them on at least on issue.

John Kozlowski

http://ShofarDomain.com Email: John.Kozlowski AT ShofarDomain.com Phone: +1 (423) 716-6432 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ShofarDomain Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShofarDomain YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/ShofarDomain

 

From: discuss-request AT lists.opennicproject.org [mailto:discuss-request AT lists.opennicproject.org] On Behalf Of Quinn Wood
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 9:11 PM
To: discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] ShofarDomain's rootless domain system

 

See Namecoin.

Eternal ownership of a domain, without any way to remove unused domains, is a bad idea. Namecoin pretty much clarified that for those in legacy DNS land that didn't already kind of think that.