不看好 New TLDs 者 這麼說 -

[best-url]

請大家把 不看好 New TLDs 者 的 意見/文章 集中發表在這個帖子上 -


Washington says -
New Internet domain names a .fail

By STEVE FRIESS | 6/13/12

Web heavyweights like Google and Amazon made an early bet on a massive real estate expansion about to sweep the Internet — and concerned lawmakers on Capitol Hill looked flat-footed in comparison.

The International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the California-based nonprofit set up and granted autonomy by the U.S. government, announced it received nearly 2,000 applications to open up new URL endings like .vegas, .LOL, .book and .sucks.

More than 1,000 names could potentially go live by late 2013 — a threat to the almighty .com.

Several lawmakers are nervous that allowing so many new names could cause consumer confusion, threaten the intellectual property of trademark owners and force corporations to buy their brands and names — not to actually use but to keep them out of the hands of others.

But efforts to slow down the change, including hearings held in December, didn’t keep the industry from forging ahead — a reminder that fast for Congress still isn’t cyberspeed.

“I wish they wouldn’t do it,” Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) told POLITICO on the eve of the announcement. “But they’re their own people. They make their own decisions.”

And so on Wednesday, ICANN revealed its mammoth list of the possible new generic Top-Level Domain names that may, by late 2013, join .com and 21 less successful cousins that already exist.

“This is an historic day for the Internet,” ICANN president and CEO Rod Beckstrom told those assembled to witness what they dubbed “Reveal Day” in London. “The Internet is about to change forever.”

New domains also will, for the first time, feature non-Latin characters such as those in Chinese or Cyrillic.

The list was a bonanza for geeks, a peek into where big names like Amazon.com and Google think the Internet is heading. Amazon applied for about 70 different domains ranging from the obvious — brands it owns like .amazon and .zappos — to more general names like .coupon and .wow.
At $185,000 per application — it’ll cost $25,000 a year to keep the gTLD once it is assigned — that means Amazon spent more than $12 million.

Several big brands including Delta, Aetna and Toyota did apply, but others — Coca-Cola, Kraft and Pepsi — sat out. T.J.Maxx is applying for .tjmaxx, .tjm as well as .tkmaxx, its European name.

A few domains may be particularly worrisome for political candidates and well-known companies — among them .sucks, .fail and .exposed. Beckstrom, asked during the London event about the potential for use of those by people angry with brands, hinted that there will be reviews of the intent of the potential domain owners before names are granted.

Indeed, ICANN’s announcement was the first phase of the process, and the first new top-level domain names most likely won’t appear in use until late 2013 at the earliest.

Several URL endings saw more than one application — .llc and .shop had nine each, .cloud had seven, .poker and .gay both had four — and those disputes will be resolved via auction if the applicants can’t come to an agreement on their own.

Many companies and organizations joined the rush, buying up brands and corporate names including .aarp, .tiffany and .staples; L’Oréal spent $2.4 million applying for 13, including .hair, .beauty, .makeup and .skin. The NBA grabbed .nba and .basketball and Major League Baseball snapped up .mlb and .baseball, but the NFL was content to apply only for .nfl. Two other companies are applying for .football.

Few major brands had much trouble being the only ones to apply for theirs. Coach has a competitor seeking .coach and TV network BET has three competitors for .bet.

But businesses had been lobbying lawmakers on the change and Congress has been less than pleased with ICANN’s decision to move ahead with these additional domains despite their objections. Some lawmakers have feared the additional names could constitute a shakedown of sorts for companies large and small who feel they must play online defense. Domains that have more than one qualified applicant will be sold at auction, where the price is likely to escalate.

The pleas were ignored, mainly because ICANN insisted it was devising a process to protect trademarks and consumers.

“I still have concerns about this plan and its potential to put consumers at an increased risk for online fraud and place an unnecessary financial burden on businesses,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) told POLITICO in a statement. “I urge ICANN to take all necessary steps to protect consumers and address the concerns raised by businesses, non-profit organizations, and law enforcement agencies.”

“ICANN listened to the complaints, not just from Congress but also from the [Federal Trade Commission], but didn’t change much of anything in response that I could see,” Esther Dyson, ICANN’s founding chairwoman, told POLITICO. Dyson, now a prominent tech startup investor and philanthropist, strongly opposed the addition of new top-level domains.

Dan Jaffe, government relations vice president for the Association of National Advertisers, said he is watching the ICANN rollout nervously. Jaffe also tried to persuade ICANN to do a smaller round of new names. The ad industry fears consumers will be confused by so many new names.

“We’re trying not to stand as a barrier to this process but as a major player in this process and also to protect consumers,” Jaffe said.

Beckstrom bristled during the press conference when asked by POLITICO to respond to the notion that the organization ignored Washington’s wishes in forging ahead.

He cited several new protections against “bad actors” taking on the trademarks of well-known companies, including a 60-day comment period that began Wednesday as well as a variety of methods through which trademark holders can contest, complain and seek relief. ICANN, he said, has retained authority to strip an administrator of a domain name, a power it didn’t have on the existing names.

“To suggest this program hasn’t listened to the concerns lacks credibility,” he said.

Still, the trade group Software & Information Industry Association issued a statement after the release of the list proclaiming ICANN’s safeguards against mischief “inadequate.”

“Now that the scope and content of applications are known, ICANN will have another opportunity to address intellectual property concerns, and must do so,” SIIA attorney Scott Bain said. “While some gTLD applicants are voluntarily providing more protection than ICANN requires, this is not the case with all applicants.”

One reason why lawmakers and lobbyists may have felt ineffectual is that they only started speaking up recently, arriving late to a long-standing conversation that started years ago.

“I think a lot of the activity in Washington has been in the past six months or a year, but the overwhelming framework was in place long before Washington began looking into this,” said Chicago-based intellectual property attorney Paul McGrady, who is shepherding about 30 top-level domain name applications for various clients he declined to name. “The activity in Washington involved a lot of people who woke up to the issue a year ago.”

Meanwhile, the whole thing could be much ado about nothing.

Ron Jackson, publisher of Domain Name Journal, believes .com will remain the undisputed champ of the Web for years to come.

“I don’t think .com will be impacted at all,” Jackson told POLITICO. “In fact, I would bet that aftermarket values of .coms will increase as the market becomes flooded with so many lesser-known alternatives.”

IDNclub.com

[best-url]

Sorry, but this round of new TLDs isn’t revolutionary

June 21st, 2012

Rules of engagement make this round of new TLDs less than satisfactory.
Last week ICANN released the names of the 1,400 some odd top level domains that might be headed to the web in the next year or two.

Despite every cliche ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom made about how the web will be changed forever, this is the biggest thing in the history of the internet, etc., I’m afraid to say it’s just not the case.

This isn’t to say that applicants didn’t come up with interesting strings. They did the best they could within a restrained system.

The real reason this isn’t revolutionary is because of the artificial restraints that were put in place.

Having 1,400 new TLDs on the web won’t change it that much. In the future, if we see tens of thousands — or hundreds of thousands — it might change. But for now it’s just more of the same; mostly just a five fold increase in the number of TLDs out there.

Here’s why this isn’t a revolution.

1. Too restrictive

The new TLD process was designed for an old way of thinking. A system where a registry controls a domain and parcels out second level domains in an attempt to make a profit. It wasn’t designed to make a second level flourish.
It wasn’t designed for .brand domains, which will be hampered with unnecessary restrictions.

Should Canon attach a .canon domain to every camera it sells? It can, but if I were them I’d just give a canon.com subdomain and save myself 25 cents in fees per domain and threats of litigation, trademark abuse, etc.

There were also unnecessary restrictions on city, state, and region domain names. Whereas some enterprising residents of a city could have gone out and created a TLD for their city to be proud of, they were blocked by the mayor or the high cost.

There’s also the Governmental Advisory Committee and the public interest objector. The former will say the world is ending over .navy (and some countries, regrettably, over .gay). It will also take its sweet time coming to this determination. And the public interest objector has a $25 million budget he’s got to put to good use.

Imagine how slow to evolve the web would have been if anyone could object to your second level .com registration. That’s kind of what we have going on here.

2. Too defensive

Many of the applicants registered domains that are clearly for defensive purposes. Even if they use them, they’ll basically be akin to a single web site. Proof? Johnson & Johnson applied for .afamilycompany. ‘Nuff said.

I certainly hope a consultant didn’t tell the company that the domain would be at risk if they didn’t apply for it.

The downside to companies registering their brands with no intent to use them is we’ll have a lot of dead namespace. People complain about ‘squatters’ registering domains and parking them. Here we have entire TLD’s being “parked”!

3. Too closed

One of the saddest things about some of the big companies applying for TLDs (I’m looking mostly at you, Amazon.com), is that they don’t want to open up second level registrations to the public.

I’ve been told that new TLDs will usher in innovation. Maybe Amazon.com has some crazy cool trick up its sleeve on how it will create innovation with a closed TLD. But not allowing anyone other than Amazon to use the .kids namespace seems like a step in the wrong direction, not toward innovation.

4. The big, innovative players are missing.

We can look at big names that applied for domains and say “they get it”. But that’s really a game of the emperor has no clothes. Maybe it’s the majority of companies who didn’t apply for a new TLD that get it.

We don’t know for sure yet. But we do know there’s no .paypal, .twitter, or .facebook. These are the types of companies that can push mass adoption. They’ve opted out, at least this time around.

5. Simply not enough to make a difference

If the revolutionary aspect of new TLDs is to open up the namespace and offer an opportunity to innovate without the usual second level .com domain, 1,400 domains isn’t going to cut it. That’s just about 5 times how many domains are already in the root (including ccTLDs).

If you want to cut the shackles of .com, then registering a domain at the top level needs to be as simple as going to GoDaddy, typing in TLD, and registering it on the spot.

No need to explain to ICANN why you want to use the domain. No need to convince someone it’s for a community’s use. No need to worry about a government’s mores.

And most of all, no reason to shell out $185,000.

Maybe I’m exaggerating a bit here. Maybe it’s not that easy, but certainly not as hard as it is to apply this time around.

(I’m not saying necessarily saying this would be a good thing, either.)
But if you want revolution, something to change up the existing namespace, then that is what it would look like.

Last week was not revolutionary. It was evolutionary. And in the grand scheme of the web, as our grandchildren look back on it many years from now, it was just a small blip on the radar.

IDNclub.com

[哈啦]

英文太長，看沒有啦。

[best-url]

作者: 哈啦

英文太長，看沒有啦。

老大 別裝蒜啦

我內心也期盼 New TLDs 起不來
才不會引響到咱們版友手上既有域名的價值...

[wufenpu]

看得好累....下一篇....

[xiaomishang]

作者: best-url

老大 別裝蒜啦

我內心也期盼 New TLDs 起不來
才不會引響到咱們版友手上既有域名的價值...

对自己手里域名的价值影响不会很大，毕竟不同后缀的域名 或许瓜分不同的市场。



但如果太过于多的tlds 就会让网友眼花缭乱了。所以适当的出新的有特定市场含义的TLDS 还不错，但太多了 就不看好了。。。。我很迷茫了。。

同一行业一个后缀我是能接受，比如：色情行业 .xxx

如果同一行业多个后缀，那就很搞笑了，假如出现3个后缀 .xxx .adult 以及 .porn 那就让人真的是头疼了。。。。。

所以不太赞同出这么多后缀。。

[best-url]

作者: xiaomishang

对自己手里域名的价值影响不会很大，毕竟不同后缀的域名 或许瓜分不同的市场。



但如果太过于多的tlds 就会让网友眼花缭乱了。所以适当的出新的有特定市场含义的TLDS 还不错，但太多了 就不看好了。。。。我很迷茫了。。

同一行业一个后缀我是能接受，比如：色情行业 .xxx

如果同一行业多个后缀，那就很搞笑了，假如出现3个后缀 .xxx .adult 以及 .porn 那就让人真的是头疼了。。。。。

所以不太赞同出这么多后缀。。

贊同 -

我同時也認為
如果 New TLDs 可以被接受,
之前的 .BIZ .INFO .JOBS .PRO 甚至 .TEL 的意義 (& '面相')
比 ICANN 發布那 新申請一千多個新候綴 裡面 大多數的 好太多了;
與其 註冊那些新後綴
還不如註冊 .PRO .BIZ 與 .INFO

[best-url]

New Internet domain names may make for a more tangled Web

By Editorial Board, Tuesday, June 26, 8:07 AM

LOOKING FOR .LOVE? How about .app or .web?

On Wednesday, ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) revealed the 1,930 applicants for new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) — like .apple, .mom, or even .book. Currently, there are only 22 generic top-level domains, foremost among them .com. But the .com domain is getting crowded, with squatters increasingly making it costly for a new business to obtain the domain name it wants.

Rather than continue to dictate which new gTLDs were made available, ICANN decided to open applications for new gTLDs to everyone. This was not a cheap process — an application fee of $185,000 presented a serious barrier to frivolous applicants.

Although numerous tech giants — Google applied for 100 gTLDs, Apple for only one — threw themselves into the new top-level domain fray, some major players (Facebook, for instance) were conspicuously absent. The jury is out on whether this move will be the biggest shift in the Internet landscape since the introduction of .com in 1985, or a total bust.

The aim of the new gTLDs is to shift the way people think about accessing the Web and move beyond the straitjacket of .com. But for the ever-increasing number of people who use the Internet on their smartphones and depend on apps rather than browsers, this shift has already taken place, and a new and potentially confusing string of letters will do little to reverse it. Customers accustomed to reaching ad campaigns through QR codes may not think of typing in new URLs as a simpler way of reaching the desired brand, as gTLD-watchers seem to hope.

Perhaps some companies now vying for competitive gTLDs like .love and .app (13 applicants) will use the new space to create something innovative or to offer added security. But a massive number of applicants are brands that are simply purchasing their own names. Such a defensive purchase by a business seeking to protect the integrity of its brand in a new space costs money but generates no value. And what of the potential for scammers? Users are already fooled by scammers with only 22 sets of endings. What will happen to them when confronted with hundreds? Is barclays.bank legitimate? What about barclays.you? How many more addresses must legitimate businesses purchase to protect their brands?

We also have questions about what will happen when the dust settles over the contested domains (if ICANN finds that all the applicants for the contested slots have merit, they will go to auction, generating millions more dollars in revenue) and they finally become the property of businesses. With Amazon running its own subdomain registries for a string like .book, what will be the fate of writers seeking sites with the .book ending? Companies that purchase the gTLDs get to determine the prices at which addresses terminating in the new strings are sold — and if they are sold at all. And will users know that .grocery is not shared by all grocers but belongs specifically to Walmart or Safeway? Will this expansion create competition or stifle it?

One thing is sure: It is happening. Whether it is a recipe for creativity or chaos remains to be seen.

IDNclub.com

[best-url]

New gTLD application batching dead?

Kevin Murphy, June 26, 2012


It’s looking increasingly possible that not only is digital archery dead, but that ICANN may also kill off the idea of batching new gTLD applications entirely this week.

Given the number of groveling apologies from staff and board about the failure of digital archery over the last few days, there doesn’t seem to be any way it can be plausibly reinstated following its shut-down last week.

But from the first three days of meetings and hallway conversations here at ICANN 44 in Prague, it’s pretty clear that doing away with batching is under serious consideration at board level.

It’s also my understanding that ICANN staff, which initially appeared reluctant to abandon plans to divide the 1,930 applications into three or four batches, is now also thinking along the same lines.

Batching is unpopular among most — but by no means all — applicants, because they don’t want to risk losing a time-to-market advantage by being allocated to a later batch.

When director Chris Disspain told an audience of applicants yesterday, “What I think the board thinks you want now is certainty,” the reaction suggested he had hit the nail on the head.

The problem ICANN has with a single batchless evaluation process is that it faces — hypothetically at least — up to 1,409 unique gTLDs exiting Initial Evaluation at the same time.

This could cause problems because it’s promised the DNS root server operators and the Governmental Advisory Committee that it will delegate no more than 1,000 new gTLDs per year.

These commitments are, at least for now, non-negotiable, chairman Steve Crocker has indicated this week.

So ICANN has to figure out a way to “rate limit” application processing so that no more than 1,000 gTLDs go live in the same 12 month period.

Many opponents of batching have stated that the process already contains several throttling mechanisms, or “gateways” as ARI Registry Services CEO Adrian Kinderis calls them.

For starters, not every application will be successful. Some will be withdrawn soon because they were tactical filings, others will not pass Initial Evaluation and will be withdrawn.

Some will fail Initial Evaluation and enter Extended Evaluation. Others will face formal objections or will find themselves in contention resolution.

In these cases, applicants can expect an extra six months of processing time, which will act as a natural throttle.

For those applications that get through to contract negotiations, ICANN’s legal department will operate on a strict first-in-first-out basis with the paper contracts, Disspain said yesterday.

But there’s a concern that these gateways might not be enough to smooth out the evaluation and approval process.

Various solutions have been put forward by the ICANN community so far this week.

These have ranged from the predictable “IDN applicants should go first” from IDN applicants and “brands should go first” from brand applicants, which both seem unlikely to be adopted, to some more inventive ideas.

Top Level Domain Holdings founder Fred Krueger and others have suggested that one way to prioritize applications would be to ask the large portfolio applicants — TLDH, Google, Donuts, et al — to decide which of their gTLDs they want to hit the root first.

“I value .london significantly more than I value .beer,” Krueger said yesterday. “I’m sure Google values .google more than .lol.”

Another idea, put forward by Uniregistry’s outside counsel Bret Fausett yesterday, was to rank applications according to how cleanly they exit Initial Evaluation.

Applications that made it through Initial Evaluation without the evaluators needing to ask any clarifying questions would be considered the “first batch”. Those that needed a single question answered would be the “second batch”, and so on.

This system would have the advantages of enabling a single batch while rate-limiting applications based on their inherent quality.

On the face of it, it’s quite an attractive idea, and it’s my sense that Fausett’s approach was well-received by ICANN. We might be hearing more about it as ICANN 44 progresses.

IDNclub.com

[best-url]

New TLDs：灾难金矿

2012-07-05

作者:网易科技专栏作家 师北宸（微博）

最近ICANN（the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers,互联网名称与数字地址分配机构）公布新顶级域名计划申请者名单,共收到1930个顶级域名申请.而此前20多年内互联网只开放了22个域名后缀（不包括.cn、.us等地区专有后缀）,包括网民最常见的.com、.net、.org以及近年来开放的.biz、.mobile、.tel等.

目前全世界已经注册了大约一亿个.com域名,以及一千万左右的.net、.org和.info域名,新机构或个人再想注册便于记忆和传播的域名已经相当困难,很多大公司甚至需要花高价去购买域名才能顺利开展业务.ICANN的域名开放计划正是为解决日渐稀少同时成本愈加高昂的域名资源而提出.

开放域名计划显然将事与愿违.本次域名开放计划并不像以往开放的顶级域名一样,开放的域名可供任何机构或个人注册一个xxx.com或xxx.net.ICANN提供类似.google、.coke、.beijing、.nyc之类的专用品牌和城市名称,以及包括.home、.app、.doc等常用名词供机构进行独占式注册.以Google为例,如果它申请的.app和.mail成功之后,所有.app和.mail下的域名都归Google所有,其它任何机构或个人均无法注册xxx.app或xxx.mail.

注册新域名后缀的成本非常高昂.每申请一个域名后缀需要一次性支付18.5万美元,外加每年2.5万美元的管理费,以及可能高达数万美元的律师费——知识产权律师都很精明.

ICANN处理申请的能力非常有限,它将分批次审批域名后缀的申请.每一批处理500个域名,每半年处理一批.按照目前近2000个域名后缀的申请来看,它将花上至少二年才能处理完手头积压的申请单,这还不包括这两年内新增申请——想必随着媒体的不断报道,申请者会更多.为确保公平,ICANN将审批方式定为“数字射箭”（Digital Archery）:设定一个时间,每个申请者同时提交,最接近目标者得胜.

任何计划都有漏洞,有漏洞则有占据相关资源的人从中借此渔利.为保证自己的申请进入第一梯队,许多大公司开始寻找能帮助自己第一时间被批的机构——比如pool.com,支付2.5万美元就可以帮客户进入前500名审批列表.

归根结底,这是大公司的游戏.但许多大公司也玩不起.

知名打火机名牌Zippo为申请.zippo已经为这一个域名后缀花费了每年3百万美元去玩“打鼹鼠游戏”——每当一个小机构冒出来申请相同的域名后缀,它就得将对方申请打下去.而事实上,就像Google申请google.xxx仅仅是为了品牌保护目的而不会用于开展任何新业务一样,Zippo申请.zippo也仅是为了保护自己的品牌,徒增每年3百万美元的开支.那些不如Zippo知名且财力远远不如Zippo的小机构,尤其是假如它们只是某个发展中国家的建筑商甚至面包商——完全不会对制造打火机的Zippo产生品牌与市场重叠的时候,仅仅因为名气和财力不够,是否就几乎完全被排除了拥有.zippo的可能性?

可以预见,同时申请了包括book、.buy、.dev、.drive、.free、.game、.mail、.map、.movie、.music、.play、.search、.shop、.show、.spot、.store、.talk、.wow、.you和.cloud等20个相同域名后缀的体量相近的互联网大鳄Google和亚马逊,为了争夺这些域名将花费远远不止20倍于每年300万美元的成本,更别说Google还有其它81个域名申请与其它机构的花费.同样,国内的企业如QQ汽车和腾讯QQ,新浪微博和腾讯微博,分别为了争夺.qq和.weibo也将付出极大的成本,而这些成本很大程度上仅仅是为了保护自己品牌不被滥用.尤其是我无法想象当新浪微博在拥有了weibo.com域名之后再拥有一个.weibo有什么意义?

本次新顶级域名计划中ICANN引以为豪一项政策是支持中文、法文、阿拉伯语等多个语种,ICANN希望借助该项措施帮助用户更好地识别企业.但更有可能出现的结果是海量欺诈网站和钓鱼网站的涌现.以腾讯为例,网络上早已到处充斥着类似qq.某域名.com的钓鱼网站盗取用户帐号,而现在网民们除了要牢记qq.com以外,还需要了解“.腾讯”及.qq是否为腾讯的官方域名,但是如果有人注册了".滕讯"推出“qq.滕讯”呢?普通用户稍不注意就容易中招.相比于.com时代,新顶级域名投入使用将给用户制造更多麻烦.

显然,ICANN还会遇到一些恶作剧或带有讽刺或其它意图的域名后缀申请,比如Google提交了搞笑的.lol的申请,这是完全可以接受的后缀,那如果未来当有申请者提交.sex、.**s甚至.fuck时该怎么处理?当涉及敏感内容时,比如碰到.GreatHitler（伟大的希特勒）的申请时该怎么处理?ICANN并不知道申请者将来会开设一个ILove.GreatHitler还是Fuck.GreatHitler.

ICANN在2008年10月发布了新通用顶级域名第一版指南文件之后,便不断遭到来自媒体、企业、行业协会、非政府组织以及政府部门等社会各界的强烈**.其中包括可口可乐、福特汽车、戴尔、宝洁、汉堡王等企业界翘楚,美国广告联盟、美国知识产权法协会、美国互动广告局等协会组织,以及美国商务部全美电信和信息管理局局长罗伦斯·斯特科林（Lawrence Strickling）出面要求ICANN减少企业“防御性注册”负担的**,都没有拦住ICANN推出新顶级域名的动作.

作为一家非营利性企业,ICANN并不认为为公众提供优良的互联网基础服务为基本原则.2012年ICANN全年预算仅为6700万美元,而新顶级域名计划一次性进账就高达3.57亿美元——ICANN显然是最大的获利者.硬顶着强烈反对声音推进该计划的顶级域名控股公司（Top Level Domain Holdings）董事长彼得·思拉什（Peter Dengate Thrush）刚从ICANN主席卸任,而去年他顶着同样强烈的反对声批准了.xxx域名专用于**内容网站.曾为.xxx域名开放游说多年的ICM Registry随后为企业提供了阻止其他人注册“某名牌名称.xxx”域名的“高级服务”,收取200美元服务费,至今年初便有8万多家企业为此支付费用.与ICANN利益**在一起的域名注册商也没少捞油水.

就像.com时代大量大中小域名囤积者一样,新顶级域名计划第一批申请名单中出现了投机者的身影.成立于2011年的网络注册机构Donuts已经获得一亿美元投资,并将其融资额一大半投入到新顶级域名申请中,它们提交的申请名单也是最长的:共307个.他们梦想成为下一个GoDaddy,成为未来域名注册商老大.

ICANN本次通用顶级域名开放计划本来早应该于四月结束,一直延期到六月是因为在接受申请时遭遇技术故障——人们对此早已司空见惯.在维护顶级域名的多年以来,ICANN每年都会碰到因各种技术故障及不确定因素导致的计划延期.仅仅为了开放.xxx一个域名,ICANN前后跳票了三次.过去十四年内陆续维护二十二个域名已经让ICANN疲于应付,一次性开放一百倍于过去十几年维护的域名的总和,无法想象ICANN爆棚的自信心从何而来.

（师北宸供网易科技专稿,转载请注明出处.文章仅代表作者个人观点）

IDNclub.com