Re: newIANA (was Fram behind closed doors via opaque channels)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Roeland and all,

Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:

> Hold on there!
>
> At 02:27 AM 7/14/98 +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote:
>
> >> Like it or not, (see Karl Auerbach's analysis at
> >> http://www.cavebear.com/nsf-dns/ ) has given credence to the
> >> notion that the .com database is proprietary information.
> >
> >.com database with contact information in SOA is not proprietary
> >to NSI nor USG and can be zone-transfered to everywhere.
> >
> >> It is important to remember that the net is edge-controlled,
> >> although the phenomena of inertia gives it the appearance of
> >> central control.
> >
> >That why the WP must be ignored.
>
> I thought *I* was the renegade here <grin>
>
> Were you a lurker on the DOMAIN-POLICY lists? It doesn't appear so. During
> the last few months, I believe that most of us here, and on the open-rsc
> list, sort of came to the understanding that, for DNS entries, we needed a
> clearing house. A single point of reference where we could check for name
> conflicts. If you want, I could go into the entire line of reasoning here,
> but it is also available on the open-rsc archives and the DOMAIN-POLICY
> archives.
>
> This is the main reason that MHSC is participating in these discussions and
> why we want to see a reasonable outcome. Of course, our definition of
> reasonable is our own opinion <grin>.
>
> The gist of it is;
>
> 1) Completely open TLD registrations. No more restrictions!
>
> 2) Distributed root-servers, a la GRS. Each TLD owner being directly
> responsible for their own root-server for that TLD. The Entity would then
> only have to carry references to the TLD root-servers. No, you don't have
> to go back to hosts files <hmph>.
>
> 3) The Entity maintains a whois server for all TLDs and an API that allows
> a TLD registry to check for duplication/conflicts.
>
> 4) Become a central negotiator/mediator for TLD conflicts.
>
> 5) All TLDs should be paid-up at time of activation, no credit.
> (anti-piracy policy)
>
> 6) If SLD registry for the TLD, along with an active charter, is not
> operational within 90 days, the TLD is deactivated. (another anti-piracy
> policy, use it or lose it, no refunds)
>
> MHSC would be happy to pay reasonable fees ($100US/year plus 10% of SLD
> registry fees?) for such a service. We would even contribute working code.
> We might even open-source code for such a SLD registry. Then again, maybe
> we'll sell it <grin>.
>
> After many years, and goal-posts that moved so much we thought they were
> soccer-forwards, we're a little tired of waiting. We see a business need
> for some additional TLDs. No, we are not in the mood to share our complete
> business plans. The TLD's we need will work fine if semi-private. Our
> customers will simply be told to use our name-servers and GRS-roots. After
> all, they only have to find each other. MHSC.NET will resolve them to the
> Internet. Since this would be a secure system, such an architecture works
> out better anyway.
>
> However, we would rather do this openly, and straight-forward. There is
> value-add if this new TLD were visible by the rest of the Internet, via the
> Entity's root-servers. We think there is value-add, to the Internet at
> large, for the (above mentioned) six features were added to the Entity.

  Well Masataka san and all, I think Roeland makes a pretty good case here.

  What might be added would be a USER and/or Stakeholder ownership on
a shared basis.  Many models could be conceived of here and it would
benefit everyone and every organization or company tremendously.  You would
have a built in trust model in doing so.

  The other thing that Roeland doesn't mention is that even the nIANA is
attempting to steal or take direct control of IP and DNS systems.  Have you
seen their latest conclusions and proposal?

>
>
> _________________________________________________
> Morgan Hill Software Company, Inc.
> Roeland M.J. Meyer, ISOC
> (RM993)
> President and CEO.
> e-mail:        <mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com>mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com
> Web-pages:    <http://www.mhsc.com/~rmeyer>http://www.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
> Web-site:        <http://www.mhsc.com>http://www.mhsc.com
> Colorado Springs, CO - Livermore, CA - Morgan Hill, CA
> -----------------------------------------(legal notice)--------
> Note: Statements made in this message do not
>          necessarily reflect the  position of MHSC. All
>          forcasts and projections are to be considered
>          as forward-looking and presume conditions which
>          may not be referenced herein.
> -----------------------------------------(/legal notice)-------



--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com