[wg-c] domain leasing

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 07:22 AM 8/18/99 , Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
>There are two sorts of model that fit current DNS practice; One states
>that we own our names and pay a registry (NSI) to publish them under a
>TLD. For this we pay a regular fee. The other states that we do not own
>our own names and rent them from the TLD registry. If you can think of a
>third, that fits current practice, I'd be real interested.

Registry authority has been re-assigned repeatedly.

So, there is a long established pattern of practise that those in charge of 
a domain (whether it is a TLD or an SLD, or one lower in the hierarchy) can 
have their authority taken away through strictly administrative procedures.

That doesn't sound like an ownership model, does it?

And the last I heard, legal systems pay a lot of attention to established 
practise.

If Microsoft fails to pay its yearly fee for microsoft.com, they will lose 
use of he name.  That sounds like a leasing model, doesn't it?

When Microsoft let's its lease lapse, the name is automatically available 
for lease to someone else.  Such re-assignments happen all the time.

Sounds like a leasing model, doesn't it?

With respect to TLDs, there is a long history of having the DNS authority 
decide to assign TLD registry authority to a different agency.

That's how NSI got its current task, after SRI had managed com/net/org for 
EIGHT YEARS.

Doesn't sound much like an "ownership" model, does it?

So let's see substantive counters to these established facts.

d/

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker                                         Tel: +1 408 246 8253
Brandenburg Consulting                               Fax: +1 408 273 6464
675 Spruce Drive                             <http://www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA                 <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>