[ga] Solution to one problem,perhaps...

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

Has anyone ever thought about turning the operations model of the ICANN
process around... I have this bizarre concept that we can change how DNS
works in one fell swoop by creating a reasonably specific set of requirement
statements and sending them as an implementation request to the IETF...

No really - think this thru - how many of you have specific changes in
either the technology or process of operating the technology that resolves
the root of everything... with request for a next generation version of DNS
we can fix the things that are cumbersome in operating a Registrar or Root
Zone Service... heck we could add things like a Domain Revocation Control
Process for real-time shutdowns and the like...

This would also provide an interesting and new vision on how the management
team reacts to the IETF/IESG/IAB's just ramming another protocol out onto
the Internet without bothering to figure out what its impact or liabilities
are... And since today's Internet is not a test bed but a commercial
production network, maybe it needs to be treated as such.

My motion then to this GA is that we create a small WG to study and report
of the possibilities for adding services into the DNS environment for
enhanced security and to make a recommendation to the IETF that they charter
the DNS WG to implement this as per our specifications or to work with us on
perturbations. We can then look to corporate sponsorship of the process and
by this simple act we will have done a number of things.

    1)    Not that its critical, but the ISOC would have set a  value on
owning its own IP for operating itself.

    2)    The IETF would have a method of taking direction for development
of protocols specifically targeted or tuned to function as per commercial
and operational needs, rather than because you filled out the protocol port
form at IANA


Just a though

Todd


----- Original Message -----
From: "Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>
To: "Sandy Harris" <sandy@storm.ca>; <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 10:06 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] NC BS


> Sandy
> > Harris
> > Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:39 AM
> > To: ga@dnso.org
> > Subject: Re: [ga] NC BS
> >
> >
> > "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" wrote:
> >
> > > An ICANN that fails to either limit its mission so that voting isn't
> > > important, or that fails to honor the commitment to 50% control by
> > > an at-large made up predominantly of end-users, is going to be
> > an incumbent
> > > and insider protection society.  Unattractive.  Irresponsible.
> > Unstable.
> > > In fact, doomed.
> >
> > Thank you. That is the best summary of ICANN's
> > problems I've seen.
>
>
> Certainly the most succinct. I concur.
> Regards,
> Joanna
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

--
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