Re: [wg-c] The fruits of confessional conflict (Sunday after Solstice)

[Rick H Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

Eric,

I find the "Common Names Resolution Protocol WG" especially interesting,
the main contributors are either employed by NSI or RealNames both of
which have been working very hard on getting another protocol accepted as
the basis of creating additional for profit registries.

Their last atempt was foiled by the IESG after RealNames posted an I-D
written by NSI and RealNames stating the Inlectual Property rights and
the sole registry would be owned and run by RealNames.

It appears a "good" atempt to route arround the dns mess and accquire a
new registry based on trademark and IP constrainsts.

NSI recently took a 10% stake in RealNames ;-)

-rick



On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, Eric Brunner wrote:

> 
> In addition to the mess Jon sought to avoid[1], the least constructive
> rendering of service from the registry service model, FQDNs as marks, how
> value is constructed from the standard registrant-registrar transaction
> is the eventual focus of the Common Names Resolution Protocol WG in the
> IETF. Mediated access to names registration data is an area NSI showed
> interest in, at IETF-44 and -45, which is a surprise for the sole operator
> of the only registry worth mining, or slamming. Access to "common names"
> without recourse to a FQDN also comes as a surprise.
>