Re: [council] Key Challenges and Opportunities for the GNSO

["Antonio Harris" <harris@cabase.org.ar>]

Council colleagues,

I did not dream a simple suggestion would stir up such
a heated opposition!

Just for the record:
- I quoted an example from the ITU itself.
- No one suggested the GNSO has authority over the E.164
  numbering plan.
- I would refrain from asking the ITU any such question, I fail
  to see the need to do so.
- In my limited technical understanding of ENUM, I do see a root
   server in the operational diagrams. If the current root servers that
   operate in the domain namespace as we know it (not the alternate
   roots) are involved in the ENUM "unique assignments"(as Milton calls
them),
   then I do consider that ENUM is a service that merits the attention
   (not the empowerment) of the GNSO, since the operational stability
   of the Domain Name System would appear to be of some interest to
   our Council.

Also for the record, my motion to include ENUM in the Council agenda
still stands. Since calling it a "key challenge or opportunity for the GNSO"
is so resisted, perhaps it can be classified under some terminology such
as a "new technological development that merits some attention" ?

Tony Harris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>
To: <harris@cabase.org.ar>; <council@dnso.org>; <Jeff.Neuman@Neustar.us>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: [council] Key Challenges and Opportunities for the GNSO


Antonio:
>>> "Antonio Harris" <harris@cabase.org.ar> 04/09/03 12:23PM >>>
>I think we subscribe to different cable TV ?

I hope so! (AOL-Time Warner is big, but I hope it
doesn't control Argentina's cable system.)

>The ITU states:
>The ENUM protocol is a mapping into the Internet Domain Name System (DNS)
of
>parts or all of the international public telecommunication numbering plan
>defined in ITU-T Recommendation E.164.
>And this has nothing to do with the GNSO ?

Precisely so. It would seem to have something to do with ITU?
Or do you believe GNSO has some authority over the e.164
numbering plan?

If you want to have some fun, try asking someone from
ITU whether they think ENUM constitutes an "opportunity"
for ICANN's GNSO...see what reaction you get. :-)

>I am not proposing the GNSO place ENUM on the agenda for policy
>making, but wonder if it can be affirmed that ENUM does not constitute
>a "key challenge or opportunity for the GNSO", or will it be implemented
>in a parallel DNS unrelated to the one I am familiar with ?

My research center website is "implemented" using DNS, among
other protocols. Does GNSO consider my site a "key challenge or
opportunity?" Unless I completely misunderstand what you are
saying, there seems to be a fundamental confusion here.
ICANN manages assignments within DNS. It does not
manage new applications that happen to use DNS
as an input.

Anyone can create an applicationthat maps domain names
to anything else; e.g., credit card numbers, national ID numbers,
etc. Content distribution networks (CDNs) do interesting
things with domain names.

ICANN has no authority over applications that use
DNS. It has authority over unique assignments of
the DNS name space. Full stop.