Discuss mailing list

["Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com>]

Things might get confusing for users. Being two different philosophies, I 
think we should keep OpenNIC and FreeNIC separate. I would however support 
peering if it was handled like .radio.freenic or .smart.freenic.

--

-Dan Q


On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 19:36:23 +0000, Angélica Luna <luz AT freenic.org> wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> I'm one of the founding members of FreeNIC http://freenic.org/ a totally 
> free and open root that resolves all OpenNIC TLDs and most ICANN ones in 
> addition to TLDs chosen without rules or regulations by anyone who 
> wishes to join. Our TLDs are mainly for personal use; we don't require 
> second-level registration to be available. All members have equal status 
> as we have no leadership. I'm proposing a partial peering agreement, as 
> explained below.
> 
> Because we have no rules, there's nothing stopping conflicting TLDs from 
> being registered. We currently have .radio and .smart, which have been 
> registered in the ICANN root. The ICANN .radio and .smart have been 
> deleted from our root zone. Shdwdrgn is in the process of designing a 
> filter that would prevent OpenNIC from resolving FreeNIC TLDs that 
> conflict with OpenNIC or ICANN should this peering agreement be 
> accepted. Peering wouldn't take place until the filter has been implemented.
> 
> Please discuss and vote.
> 
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org