Subscribe
Dot Post - Why I hate it
Submit to Digg.com!
September 10th, 2007 by 
Jay Westerdal
I love new TLDs however I hate the Dot Post proposal. Sponsored TLDs should not be allowed anymore. DotPro and DotMusuem are good examples of why sponsored TLDs should not be allowed. Setting up one company to dictate a TLD seems to be a bad idea that goes against the core principal of the free democratic nature of the Internet.
If you want a domain, you should be allowed to registered it, first come first serve. The Universal Postal Union (part of the UN) wants a separate TLD just for themselves to dictate. The UN already has DotInt. They can setup whatever they want at Example.Int. So they should set up Post.Int. Their proposal to ICANN for .Post can simply be done one level below .Int and it would not require ICANN. Why are they complicating their idea with ICANN? If they have a good idea they should just implement it under a sub-domain. Being a root domain doesn’t make the idea better. If the idea is worth its salt it can work under DotInt.
I think Countries should be the only organizations that control a global top level name space. Everything else should be run by competitive registries on a first come first serve basis. If people want to control top level name space, let them set up space and have UDRP procedures for people that abuse the nature of the space. Set up the space with rules, then allow anyone to register in it. Assume everyone is following the rules and don’t check registrations as they sign up. If someone feels that someone in that name space is violating the rules they can challenge the entity.
I favor the creation of as many TLDs as the market will bear. If you want a domain in a new name space, just register it.
I would love to see Postal Mail being addressed with DNS entries but I don’t believe that the DNS entry should have to exist under a special name space. Just publish an RFC on how it should work and let the technical people enable their own DNS to operate with those specs.
« Newer Post Older Post »
Posted in ICANN, Postal Domain |
September 10th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Jay,
I mostly agree with much of what you don’t like about the proposal. I really can’t understand how adding this TLD is going to streamline the Universal Postal Union unless it incorporates new secure or encrypted internet standards within the TLD itself. Regarding only allowing countries being able to control a global top level name space I disagree though. I believe major worldwide organizations such as NATO, The United Nations, etc. should be within a separate specific TLD.
I am surprised the UN is using the .org and not doing anything with the .com, .net they control. They should be required to use the .int TLD or similar … it’s a complete waste of the .com, .net IMO. I also remember some huge fiasco involving one of their other TLDs a while back as well. I believe it was on snapnames.com at some point, because I remember bidding on it. Until money doesn’t decide the way things are though I think you will probably see more worthless TLDs popping up along the way. I’m sure some other union will make a plea to get one for the industry they control too.
September 10th, 2007 at 8:39 pm
After reading some of their promo materials, I tend to agree with Jay. A postal TLD should not be elitist. It should be a tool for getting the mail (both physical and email) to its destination.
Ms Domainer