ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

2008-07-02 09:26:57
(It's always a bummer when ietf-general turns into ICANN-general, but in this case it seems like a useful discussion because the IETF will probably be asked policy questions for various proposed TLDs.)

At 10:17 AM -0400 7/2/08, Thomas Narten wrote:
 > In a more sane world, no one rational would want to build a
 business or other activity around a TLD named "local".   But
 this is demonstrably not a sane world.

Right. I can see the business case for this. :-(

But at least in the first round, the barrier to entry is so high that
I don't see that sort of thing as being viable.

Then you're not being creative enough.

The figure $100K for
a TLD application is what is floating around at the moment, though
that number is not nailed down definitively.

...nor justified financially...

For much of the domain tasting related activities, a fundamental
premise was that the cost of using a name was very low (i.e., zero,
while the AGP was being leveraged).

If that was true, then a domain that was popular but lost its name due to negligence in renewal should be able to buy it back from the taster for a few hundred bucks. Instead, the price I have heard more than once is tens of thousands of dollars.

Without doing a lot of business research and probably some traffic capture, you can't estimate the value of .local or a TLD that is a typo but not really infringing of a popular search term. We scoff at people who say "it would be easy to just add privacy to that protocol"; they should scoff at us for making wild guesses about values in a huge, unregulated business that is less than ten years old.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>