RE: Thick vs.thin (was: [ga] Casting stones)

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>]

Ross,

Do you have any data to back up your conclusion about the cost of the
network?

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@tucows.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 10:54 AM
> To: 'Stephane Bortzmeyer'; 'Rick Wesson'; 'Joop Teernstra'; 'Michael
> Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law'; 'Gary Osbourne'; 
> DannyYounger@cs.com;
> ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: Thick vs.thin (was: [ga] Casting stones)
> 
> 
> While the thick registry is certainly convenient from a 
> management point
> of view, the cost to the network likely exceeds the value of the
> savings...
> 
> 
> 
>                        -rwr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
> idiot."
> - Steven Wright
> 
> Please review our ICANN Reform Proposal:
> http://www.byte.org/heathrow
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org] On Behalf 
> > Of Stephane Bortzmeyer
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 10:07 AM
> > To: Rick Wesson; Joop Teernstra; Michael Froomkin - U.Miami 
> > School of Law; Gary Osbourne; DannyYounger@cs.com; ga@dnso.org
> > Subject: Re: Thick vs.thin (was: [ga] Casting stones)
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 09:46:46AM +0200,
> >  Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org> wrote 
> >  a message of 30 lines which said:
> > 
> > > With the thick model (when implemented from the beginning 
> of a TLD),
> > > the registry can go jurisdiction shopping in order to be able to  
> > > implement whatever privacy policy they like.  
> > 
> > I'm not sure it is effective. For instance, ICANN 
> > accreditation for a registrar in .com requires the registrar 
> > to escrow a copy ot its database to ICANN (I do not know how 
> > many comply). Therefore, US rules apply to everybody, 
> > whatever the registrar it chooses.
> > 
> > > (Ever thought about
> > > what happens when you put a thick registry into a country with  
> > > strict privacy regulations?)
> > 
> > The future .eu will work that way (thick and under "strict" 
> > privacy regulations). Registrants who find these regulations 
> > too strict ("I want to give away my personal data") can 
> > always transmit them by themselves :-)
> > 
> > > With the thin model, the customer can go jurisdiction 
> shopping when
> > > selecting the registrar.  
> > 
> > The .eu registry will probably (people in Brussels still think about
> > it) implement a different model, where people will be able to 
> > express their privacy desires (may be with P3P 
> > <URL:http://www.w3.org/P3P/)>. Two contenders for the 
> > management of the Registry, CORE and us, are working on a 
> > common proposal (do not hold your breath, there are 
> > complicated technical and political
> > issues) for expressing privacy requirments.
> > 
> > --
> > 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@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@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