[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: identification of the TLD constituencies

To: Annie Renard <Annie.Renard@nic.fr>
Subject: Re: identification of the TLD constituencies
From: Marcel Schneider <schneider@switch.ch>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:56:55 +0200
cc: comment-so@icann.org, centr@ripe.net
In-reply-to: Message from Annie Renard <Annie.Renard@nic.fr> of "Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:33:29 +0200." <199904150933.LAA16091@gaillac.nic.fr>
References: <199904150933.LAA16091@gaillac.nic.fr>
Sender: owner-comment-so@zephyr.isi.edu

On Thursday, 15 Apr 1999, Annie Renard writes:
> The terms "open" and "closed" should not be used for the classes of TLD
> constituencies. The right identifications are "ccTLD" and "gTLD" registries.
> ccTLD are by nature by geographies, and gTLD are generic. 

Complete agree with Annie Renard of FR registry. In addition, the
terms open and close are undefined and everybody can interprete 
them arbitrarily (as already happend).

In addition these terms have biased meanings. Very unfortunate
selection of words.

> Best regards,

> ---
>         Annie Renard    [nic@nic.fr]
>         AFNIC/NIC France
> 	c/o INRIA domaine de Voluceau BP105, 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX, France
> 	http://www.nic.fr/
> 	Personal Email: Annie.Renard@nic.fr

Marcel Schneider@SWITCH

Follow-Ups:
- Re: identification of the TLD constituencies
  - From: Hank Nussbacher <hank@ibm.net.il>

References:
- identification of the TLD constituencies
  - From: Annie Renard <Annie.Renard@nic.fr>

Prev by Date: identification of the TLD constituencies
Next by Date: closed/open vs ccTLD/gTLD
Prev by thread: identification of the TLD constituencies
Next by thread: Re: identification of the TLD constituencies
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread