NSI SAYS FCC SHOULD ASSUME INTERNET REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

I'm sorry for taking up NANOG with this, but I couldn't resist...

Has anyone botherered to look how many people it takes to handle
registrations, deletions, management of systems, programming, etc? Now,
lets think about this. What happened when InterNIC *first* started
providing domain registrations? It was pure hell. Registrations took
forever. They went through a few different database formats, software
changes all the time, you couldn't get them on the phone, etc etc.

It took THIS long to get InterNIC to where they are today, and now we want

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And where are we today...

Registrations take forever.
You can't get them on the phone.
They delete domains at random claiming they didn't pay.
They delete domains based on minimal assertions by trademark owners.

to shove in 28 new ones? And each one of these 28 new ones is going to try
and add domains to each of the 7 new tlds? We are going to start seeing
legal hassles like nothing else. "I sent in my registration for my.firm at
3:32 PST to yyy registrations. Well, I sent mine in at 7:15 EST for it to
zzz registrations, but they processed mine first, so I get it".

Actually, I believe procedures for resolving this are part of the IAHC
documentation. If not, they certainly should be included prior to starting
up such a process.

Personally, I think that the new TLD's are good, though I would personally
cut out ones such as .nom because that is just going to cause legal
problems about who owns smith.nom, etc, but I don't think new registrars
should be added. InterNIC should be it, one company providing this sort of
thing is a hell of a lot more powerful than 20 little ones.

The problem with this is many-fold. Not the least of which is that currently,
NSI has no accountability to the user-community it serves. Free-market
choice is shown to be a powerful way to create client-centric services.
If you have another proposal to make NSI accountable for it's actions to
the people it should be accountable to, let's hear it. Otherwise, I'll
take the IAHC proposal over the current situation any day.

> If you agree with the IAHC solution then show your support
> and advocate that your company sign the MoU.

You know, someone should really make an alternate proposal and see how
many people sign for that or at least some sort of survey.

There are currently two choices on the table. I don't know what has stopped
you from presenting any others you feel are appropriate.
  A The way things are today... NSI controlled
  B The IAHC proposal.

Of those, I'll take B. I welcome any better proposals, though.

Giving the people only one choice doesn't really prove anything.

Obviously, you pick A from the two choices above, but that's still
one of two choices. I don't see where you get one choice.

I'd certainly welcome additional choices on the above menu.

Owen

2

> "I sent in my registration for my.firm at
> 3:32 PST to yyy registrations. Well, I sent mine in at 7:15 EST for it to
> zzz registrations, but they processed mine first, so I get it".
>
Actually, I believe procedures for resolving this are part of the IAHC
documentation.

Yes they are. The preventation of such race conditions is one of the main
reasons for having a central CORE database rather like the central 800
number database. This also allows the use of commercial database software
which solved this race condition approx. 25 years ago. And there is an
IETF proto-WG already formed and working on protocols for the shared
registries and central database with two working implementations already
being played with. Send email to wessorh@ar.com for info on the WG.

There are currently two choices on the table. I don't know what has stopped
you from presenting any others you feel are appropriate.
  A The way things are today... NSI controlled
  B The IAHC proposal.

C The eDNS proposal
D The Name.Space proposal
E Numerous other proposals made over the past two years that never
   gathered significant support behind them.

I'd certainly welcome additional choices on the above menu.

The European Community wants the whole thing negotiated, decided and run
by government bureaucrats. They are *NOT* pleased that the IAHC has
attempted an end-run around their bureaucratic fiat in Brussels. So I
suppose this is a choice as well; shall we call it the Brussels round of
the GATT, negotiations expected to be finalized sometime in 2008. :frowning:

Two key documents (and short ones to boot) that everyone on this list
should read are here:

IAHC Final Report
http://www.iahc.org/draft-iahc-recommend-00.txt

gTLD Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
http://www.iahc.org/draft-iahc-recommend-00.txt

Note that the MoU is even shorter than the report and you could
realistically sign the MoU even if you do not agree with every single
point in the IAHC report. Also note that by signing the MoU, your company
gets the right to be consulted about any future DNS changes as well as the
right to review all activities of the POC and CORE. This is because every
organization that signs the MoU gets one seat on the Policy Advisory
Board.

This means that in the future it will be quite clear what the Internet
community's position is because everyone who registers to vote, will have
a vote via the PAB.

Register today. http://www.iahc.org/docs/contact-MoU.html

Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting
Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-250-546-3049
http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael@memra.com

3

> registrations, deletions, management of systems, programming, etc? Now,
> lets think about this. What happened when InterNIC *first* started
> providing domain registrations? It was pure hell. Registrations took
> forever. They went through a few different database formats, software
> changes all the time, you couldn't get them on the phone, etc etc.
>
> It took THIS long to get InterNIC to where they are today, and now we want
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And where are we today...

Registrations take forever.

Actually, before all this mess with new billing started, I got
registrations done in UNDER a day.

My fastest time was 5 minutes.

You can't get them on the phone.

Well you could before all this past billing crap started :slight_smile:

They delete domains at random claiming they didn't pay.
They delete domains based on minimal assertions by trademark owners.

[see above]

> Giving the people only one choice doesn't really prove anything.
>

Obviously, you pick A from the two choices above, but that's still
one of two choices. I don't see where you get one choice.

I'd certainly welcome additional choices on the above menu.

No you don't understand.

See, unless you have something solid of all the people who AREN'T signing,
you can't figure what the ratio is between the people who want it and the
people who don't.

Jordan