<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] you did well
Dear Stuart,
you published a strange document one "alternate roots". Then you removed
your name from it and you did well. This issue is religious. So you better
not to embark in it lightly. The most stable and reliable people on other
issues become childish when refereeing to roots. They just "become roots"
about it.
The work you present is impressive so it cannot be read nor commented in
five minutes or 10 lines. But I feel I read "serious" Irish study books,
from IRA about Loyalists, from Protestants about Catholics, from English on
the Republic.
I take you are a clever person: I am sure you realized yourself your method
does not stand. You start from your concepts, use "your" own wrong words,
miss most of the reality, confuse many issues and loop back into your
concepts after having decided you won against a cause no one defend. I do
not know if your conclusion is right or wrong, but it is not made.
The issue is obviously of importance. So I will suggest you a protocol:
1) do not consider what cons and pros are claimed: most of them are
emotional by people not even understanding their cause.
2) consider the name space. What it is, who is sharing it, how is it
regulated by languages, usages, semantic, geography, history, poetry,
music, literature, laws, etc... Try to figure out where the DNS space fits
and what might be its rules and possibilities. Take example on TM,
copyright, private names, etc... This is one of the most intrinsic issue of
the human being (words, and word logic). One kills for that.
3) make you explained what the DNS is, what is its role, what has been
expected from the DNS in the past what could it do in the future.
Understand what authoritative and unique mean (dont ask IEFT, ask yourself
once you have well understood). Remember the history*y of sciences. The DNS
is hierachical as the World is flat. The World has not changed and it is
not flat anymore. The DNS will still be hierarchical and the root unique
with thousands of RSCs (Root Service Centers). BTW read RFC 920 carefully.
4) consider the best interests of the Internet Users starting with their
rights (the e-environment related article of the Human Rights is still to
word out, but we know to exist and be protected, to speak and broadcast, to
listen what we want, to associate, own and develop) and more its
possibilities written in the code. I can document you several DNS+ services
I never heard anywhere that are built-in the DNS concept. You are not
considering petty disputes from the past, but the Internet future....
5) consider the real world, what is the net who is actually deciding, what
you can what you cannot do. What will be the impact of a given policy or
not.... What are the strength and the weakness of each possibilities. The
feasibility of each position: legal, political, financial, commercial. Ask
the technical implications. Do not only consult the guy next door, but the
real actors. Look at the legal obligations of the iCANN by the White Paper,
the MoU, the Articles and ByLaws. Look at what is been done, right and wrong.
6) then try to explain:
- if the issue is so important why the iCANN which is the custodian of the
root has given this responsibility to an open position, the SSRAC pages are
not updated and the CRADA has never been documented....
- What also made you to issue a document today against all the rules (the
DNSO has not been consulted: you tried to dictate it a position while it is
his role to document a position for the BoD to decide. What was so
important and urgent for you to compete with the DNSO, as if you distrusted
it).
- in the ".biz" case what was the proof of concept intended?
7) then be honest with yourself.
I am interested by the result.
Jefsey
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|