[wg-review] Domains and other matters

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

A few thoughts for consideration:

I apologise for my lack of participation but due to other commitments
and a problem with subscribing I have not been available previously.

There has been substantial discussion of a possible IDNH/O
constituency, and associated membership criteria etc.

On the point of definition for describing a domain registration as
ownership or merely holding a domain I have no strong opinions, in
practical terms we are definitely only holders at the moment and do
not retain any ownership rights.  Personally, I would like to see
ownership rights conferred, but my understanding of the system
precludes this as a possibility.

One item for discussion I would like to raise for consideration is
this: not all domains are equal.  Or more distinctly, the usage of
domains is not equal in all circumstances.

There are a large number of organizations operating as third level
registries.  Where hostnames are distributed either for free or on a
commercial basis on SLD's.  There are also some domains used that have
a large DNS zone associated with them for both commercial and
non-commercial uses.

Some of the third level registries have more hostnames in their zones
than a large number of ccTLD's.

Although it is possible for the SLD owners to join either one of the
existing constituencies or possibly an IDNH/O if one is formed, the
only option for users of their hostnames is currently the AtLarge
system.

It would appear to me that any organization forming to represent the
interests of overall users would need to take such matters under
consideration.  Should not any voting rights or other membership
criteria take into consideration how many people may be represented
and/or affected by decisions made.

Personally I consider it paramount that the DNSO has a number of
different constituencies formed under it to represent the largest
possible number of users.  I see the constituencies being nodes of the
DNSO that would provide feedback, discussion and opinion.  The DNSO
would assign weighting to each constituency representing the number of
users affected, this would determine the voting rights for the
constituency.  Such a system could absorb any cross membership amongst
constituencies.  For instance, I am a business owner, run a non-profit
organization and am also an independent domain owner/holder.  Why
should I not have a say in all three constituencies if I desire.  The
decisions made by them will affect me.

The more constituencies formed, covering a wide range of user
participation will encourage greater participation by users, the
numbers within each constituency would be such that users would not be
flooded by participation in mailing lists and working groups.
Limiting the number of constituencies will have the effect of creating
coke points and limiting true user participation.

One thing that concerns me greatly with the DNSO and the current
constituencies is the actual numbers of participants.  I think it is
very dangerous to have small numbers of people making and recommending
decisions that will affect numbers far greater than their own sum of
members.

We should do everything possible to encourage wider participation.
Even if it means more work.

Dassa


--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html