🚀 go-pugleaf

>Eric Weisberg <weisberg@texoma.net> writes:
>
>>In other words, why not  (as Michael suggests) have a mechanism for
>>continuing the existence of a TLD after the entity which undertakes its
>>propogation ceases to function?
>
>This can occur only if the "ownership" of the top-level domain resides
>with some government.  If the "ownership" is with some private party,
>the status of the domain will be in limbo until the slow legal process
>completes and somebody else manages to acquire rights to the relevant
>databases.


    This is only true if you define 'entity' in a very strange way. If the
ownership of the top-level domain resides with some government, how can its
existence continue if the 'entity which understakes its propogation' (that
government, presumably) ceases to exist?

    Now, if you say, "no fair, governments don't propogate", I can respond
that a private arrangement doesn't have to do the propogation -- it could be
an affiliation of companies that hire another entity to do the propogation.

    The answer to the complaint is -- with or without a government, if the
entity responsible for doing something or seeing that it is done goes away,
so does that something. This is a fact of reality. If there were anything
left to fix it, the real 'entity' wouldn't be gone.

    Governments are not magic wands.

    DS