RE: Top Level Domain Finder Tools

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>]

> From: Stephen J. Wilcox [mailto:steve () opaltelecom co uk]
> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 3:29 PM

> .. also ORSC sounds techie friendly - it has the word open in 
> so it must
> be good - but c'mon theres no difference between it and new.net or
> whoever? having said that maybe it would be better than icann.. only
> problem is who has to give them the authority and make 
> everyone abide by
> it?

The effort to remove colliders has been on-going for a little over a year.

Over much discussion it was decided that, if a TLD was in contention, none
of the zone servers would be referenced for that TLD. Many of the colliders
got together and ironed out their differences. In some cases, one party sold
their interest to the other party. In other cases, they merged. Yet, in
other cases, one-side capitulated. In the remaining cases, neither of the
parties are in the ORSC root zone.

That sets the initial entry. However, it doesn't resolve the case where a
usurper comes along later (like ICANN, with the BIZ TLD, or new.net). The
obvious answer is to keep the incumbent and ignore the usurper. However, one
can only play that game with commanding market-share and solid FCFS
historical precedent.

ICANN desires to not play there and refuses to acknowlege FCFS. Therefore,
taking their cue from ICANN, new.net plays likewise. Both ignore ORSC
efforts. Given new.net resources, comparative to ICANN, we may be facing a
serious threat of DNS name space fragmentation.

Seeing at least a three-way fracture, of the root, it looks as if this will
be resolved in the law.

Remember, the law is not about moral rectitude or justice. It is about who
can field the most effective squadron of attorney's. The first requirement
of that is money which Idealabs has in abundance, ICANN is short of (unless
WIPO gets involed), and ORSC has none of.