Proposed dot-WEB tld and Chris Ambler

[David G]

Chris, hope you are here? Just heard about some new tld's being proposed and disappointed to see .web which you and IOD have championed for so many yrs NOT on the application list (but I am not sure?). Is it?

I have serious money invested in almost 100 .web pre-registrations and not too long ago you said there was a real good chance web would be approved by 2005? I had such faith in web going into the root have even purchased a few more prereg .web's this year! What happened?

Why does it seem the new application was NOT submitted to ICANN, as it appears? Are you still a consultant, owner or employee of IOD (in addition to being with Enom)? Perhaps I am missing something or wrong on it not being proposed? Thanks.

Link to .WEB: http://www.webtld.com/

P.S. Anyone else here invest in web pre-registrations? Any other opinions as to if it will ever be approved?

 

[cambler]

This round was for Sponsored TLDs only. .Web is the poster-child of an Unsponsored TLD. As such, it would have been properly rejected.

ICANN is under orders from the Department of Commerce to open new unsponsored applications in 2005, and we are pushing for non-accepted applications from 2000 to be addressed first.

 

[furca]

That is extremely weird! About a year ago I remembered the .web in the public root server. When these were announced I thought of the .web extension and the quote from earlier " This year will be a promising year"

 

[cambler]

.Web has never been in the root servers.

 

[furca]

.Web has never been in the root servers.

Public Root Server Whois

TLD : .web
Registrar : The .Web Internet Domain Registry
Company Name : The .Web Internet Domain Registry
Contact : Hostmaster
Street : 1241 Johnson Avenue, Suite 201
City : San Luis Obispo
State : CA
Zip : 93401-3306
Country : United States
Phone Number : +1 805 543 4716
Fax Number : +1 805 543 4735
Email : [email protected]

Name Servers

Name-Server 1 : ns1.web-zone.webtld.com
Name-Server 2 : ns2.web-zone.webtld.com



The .web TLD is found in the Inclusive Name Space


Click here to go to the .web registry




PUBLIC-ROOT WHOIS


http://www.newroot.com

 

[cambler]

That's not the root servers.

That's an alternate set of root servers used by 12 people and their dog.

 

[Nexus]

That's not the root servers.
That's an alternate set of root servers used by 12 people and their dog.

Kind of like pre-Icann dot-Biz.

~ Nexus

 

[doubledee999]

Kind of like pre-Icann dot-Biz.

~ Nexus

no icann .biz site http://www.atlanticroot.com/

 

[Steen]

Pre-order of .web is a joke imo.

 

[cambler]

There are no "pre-orders" or "pre-registrations" of .Web.

All registration are just that - registrations. When ICANN finally starts approving more gTLDs, and .Web is put in the root, they will resolve in the root. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Steen]

There are no "pre-orders" or "pre-registrations" of .Web.

All registration are just that - registrations. When ICANN finally starts approving more gTLDs, and .Web is put in the root, they will resolve in the root. Nothing more, nothing less.

"I have serious money invested in almost 100 .web pre-registrations and not too long ago you said there was a real good chance web would be approved by 2005?"

 

[cambler]

I still feel that way. Unless ICANN finds some way to skirt the requirements that DoC and NTIA have put on it, they have to start approving applicants in 2005. Of course, nothing is certain - this *is* ICANN we're talking about.

 

[David G]

There are no "pre-orders" or "pre-registrations" of .Web.

All registration are just that - registrations. When ICANN finally starts approving more gTLDs, and .Web is put in the root, they will resolve in the root. Nothing more, nothing less.

Since the tld is not in the root and they do not resolve, my describing them as 'pre-registrations' is very fitting and appropriate, IMO.

With all due respect it seems like a smoke-screen when you say they are really 'registrations' even though the ext has not been approved by ICANN.

 

[Domagon]

I see my .WEB registrations from several years ago are still there - cool. Working now to update the dns to make them work again for folks using alternative roots; not many do.

.WEB seems redundent, but it certainly beats .info and .biz in usefulness; .web is intuitive.

A possible wrinkle with .WEB, beyond many of the obvious, is that .WEB itself is trademarked - I'd suspect companies would be leery of using domains in .web for much beyond place-holders and redirectors. Perhaps this is not a problem, since it appears all the .WEB applications pending at the USPTO are seemingly perpetually suspended...?

Ron

 

[gph]

.WEB seems redundent, but it certainly beats .info and .biz in usefulness; .web is intuitive.

Not yet it doesn't.....

gph

 

[adoptabledomains]

.WEB seems redundent, but it certainly beats .info and .biz in usefulness; .web is intuitive.

.web seems less useful to me. email and ftp are not technically the www, but generally "web enabled". The web is only part of the internet. Although I guess it's as good as any others. Personally I really like .info when used for the correct type of site.

BTW, ICANN is supposed to start accepting new gTLD applications by year end after approving any sTLD's. Two sTLD's were approved last week and negotiations have started with .travel and .post applicants. Sounds to me like the gTLD's would probably be on track for applications early next year. Although I really don't think we need any more gTLD's yet.

 

[MediaHound]

A Tale Of Two Roots, Part the Third
http://onthenet.ambler.net/blog

worth a read
Alternative root?
Now it seems like its down to push and shove.
What's taking so long, anyway?

 

[acronym007]

I like .web but I am upset that they allowed these pre-reg's prior to acceptance and without letting the public know before most the good names were taken. I think ICANN should be wary or companies that operate in this manner, this is akin to insider stock trader and the company has an unfair advantage if it allows people to reg prior. I hate when the goevernment gets involved with our lives but this is one case where we might need some regulation to discourage this type of behavior. When industrios create unfair advantage and take away competition for products or services it is border line illegal and not in the best interest of free enterprise. My opinion only.

 

[cambler]

acronym, please check your history.

The .Web registry went live on 31 July, 1996 at the direction of IANA and Jon Postel. When the .com registry went live, the public was not notified, either.

Jon Postel asked us to take the regsitry live to prove the system, and had promised that it would be in the roots by October of that year. Before he could do that, the Internet Society took over, formed the IAHC and attempted to take over the root. As we all know, that failed, the US Government stepped in and formed ICANN, and we have the system we have now.

Indeed, ICANN decided in November of 2000 to not award .Web to Afilias and NeuStar, who had applied for it, specifically because of IOD's standing and existing registrations.

Had you been participating in the new TLD discussions in 1996, you would have known of .Web - just because you weren't there, it should be considered unfair somehow? If that's your opinion, should the public be notified of every business opening everywhere in the world? Hardly.

This argument was made in 1998 and again in 2000 and both times put to rest.

 

[David G]

So when if ever do you think it will be approved?

I still have those 100 .web names from long ago.