Discuss mailing list

[<vv AT cgs.pw>]

I agree with your outline of problems with
ccTLDs for OpenNIC. However, as you say yourself,
a ccTLD is under the jurisdiction of a country.
This is not the case with .RUS. I can therefore
only conclude that .RUS is not a ccTLD in the
normal sense of that word.

I would therefore like to emphasise:
an OpenNIC TLD with the letters .RUS is NOT
a ccTLD, and should not be treated as such.

Regards,
        Ole


On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 15:57:07 +0100
Al Beano <albino AT autistici.org> wrote:

> Hi Dmitry,
> 
> Sorry for my sporadic replies — I've been quite busy
> lately and haven't had time to fully catch up with this
> list. 
> 
> I don't think quantity necessarily equals quantity in
> this situation. OpenNIC doesn't want to offer a
> bewilderingly large array of TLDs, it wants to offer a
> selection of unique ones with passionate people behind
> them. 
> 
> Alt-ccTLDs then present a couple of issues: firstly, that
> there's no way to decide who should control them: the
> first people to come along might not be the best. This is
> not meant as a personal insult to you; I think you'd be a
> very good administrator of .rus, but this issue could
> crop up in other cases. 
> 
> On the other hand, the opposite may be true: why should
> only Russia and Australia have alt-ccTLDs? We will never
> have enough T1 admins to cover every country (at least,
> not for the foreseeable future). 
> 
> ICANN solves this problem by giving each country TLD to
> some government authority, afaik, and letting them do
> what they wish with it. This isn't really possible for
> us. 
> 
> Secondly, promoting the creation of alt-ccTLDs encourages
> would-be contributors simply to pick a country and start
> a TLD for that. Every proposal would look the same and
> there wouldn't be any way to differentiate the people
> behind them. If people don't have to demonstrate that
> they're willing to put in the time to develop an original
> idea and charter for the TLD they want, I think we may
> see many new TLDs being created and quickly falling into
> disrepair. 
> 
> I understand that this is harsh criticism to an idea
> you're obviously enthusiastic about, but overall, I don't
> see a real advantage of creating these TLDs. Unless these
> issues are addressed in some way, I will vote no to
> proposals of new ccTLDs. 
> 
> albino
> 
> On 27 September 2017 12:03:20 BST, "Dmitry S. Nikolaev"
> <dn AT mega-net.ru> wrote:
> >Hi.
> >
> >Can anyone else say something about new-nations.net ?
> >
> >Also:
> >
> >On 24.09.2017 17:05, Al Beano wrote:  
> >> If we start allowing them, everyone will want one for
> >> their country  
> >and people who just want a TLD will be able to get one
> >with relatively little real work (and therefore won't
> >think much of it). On 24.09.2017 20:27, vv AT cgs.pw
> >wrote:  
> >> I too am a little confused about the idea of a ccTLD.  
> >
> >On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 10:23 PM, Dmitry S. Nikolaev
> ><dn AT mega-net.ru <mailto:dn AT mega-net.ru>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >    And why not ? What are you afraid of ?
> >
> >So Ole (vv AT cgs.pw) and Al Beano (albino AT autistici.org)
> >can you answer ?
> >
> >Thanks.
> >
> >With best regards, Dmitry S. Nikolaev
> >virus_net
> >
> >On 26.09.2017 19:18, Dmitry S. Nikolaev wrote:  
> >> Hmmm... are you sure ? What a news for me ! Separate
> >> projects but  
> >with  
> >> obligations to each other ?
> >>
> >> If you sure, so than they can take and other TLD`s
> >> also. I find this post  
> >https://www.new-nations.net/en/discussion/show/id/239  
> >> about .o TLD
> >>
> >> If I understand right they now have only:
> >> - .uu
> >> - .ti
> >> - .te
> >> -.ku   
> >>
> >> Maybe then it is worth combining OpenNIC efforts with
> >> them ? I think it`s better.
> >>
> >> P.S. I don`t see .RUS there or even suggestion of it.
> >> With best regards, Dmitry S. Nikolaev
> >> virus_net
> >> On 26.09.2017 18:31, Amrit Panesar wrote:  
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 10:23 PM, Dmitry S. Nikolaev  
> ><dn AT mega-net.ru>  
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>     And why not ? What are you afraid of ? 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Conflicts with New Nations is one that comes to mind
> >>>
> >>> https://www.new-nations.net/en/about/showpage
> >>>
> >>> Alternative cc-tlds generally go through New Nations.
> >>>
> >>> I could be wrong, but as far as I know, OpenNIC still
> >>> has active peering agreements with New Nations.
> >>> I'm not aware of how active their community is, but
> >>> New Nations  
> >seems  
> >>> more appropriate for an alternative cc-tld
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -- 
> >>> Amrit Panesar
> >>> http://amrit.be
> >>>  
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >--------
> >You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> >You may unsubscribe by emailing
> >discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
>