[dnssec-deployment] A gazillion new TLDs
steve at shinkuro.com
Fri Jun 27 10:03:52 EDT 2008
The cost of applying for a new GTLD will be tens of thousands of
dollars. Maybe more. The total number that can be processed in one
round is limited. It's a safe bet that we won't see 1,000 new GTLDs
added all at once.
The criteria are intended to be minimal. There are provisions for
stopping an application if there are objections from specific
quarters, and if there is contention for the same name, it's
anticipated there will be an auction. The window will open for a
while and then close. After one round, we'll see what adjustments,
if any, are needed. In the terms people on this list are used to
dealing in, the numbers are very, very small. (Except, of course,
for the application fee. That's very, very large.)
On Jun 27, 2008, at 3:45 PM, Edward Lewis wrote:
> At 14:54 +0200 6/27/08, Steve Crocker wrote:
>> This is silly.
> It is silly to base conclusions on very little data, but not as
> silly to ask questions.
>> The large TLDs -- COM, NET, DE -- are thousands of times
>> as large as the root will ever be.
> Although there has been a lot of talk about the change (even making
> the banner on the BBC News web site yesterday - which had very
> grandiose words marking the ICANN event), I haven't seem much in
> the way of detail about the gating function. Just some slides
> David Conrad posted to another list:
> The slides show a process, but not the criteria used for the
> decisions. This is why I have uncertainty over the scale. Mind
> you, all I have access to are the single set of slides.
> What I am saying is 1) if this scales big, it'll be work. 2) I
> don't know what will prevent it from scaling big. (Keep in mind
> with #2 - I also don't have any reason to believe it will want to
> scale big. A single set of slides )
> The question I have foremost is - how big does "conventional
> wisdom" think the root will grow? Secondly, will the process as
> defined be able to pass all muster and guide the root into the
> anticipated size?
> Of course, this isn't a DNSSEC matter, until we get to knowing the
> workload on deploying DNSSEC. (Even if the delegations aren't
> deploying DNSSEC.)
> Edward Lewis
> Never confuse activity with progress. Activity pays more.
More information about the Dnssec-deployment