Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1069
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Friday, March 8 2002            Volume 01 : Number 1069

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 17:40:25 +0100 (MET)
From: Per Koelle <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 06:32:38AM -0500, Peter de Blanc wrote:
> > It is truely amazing that something once  done by volunteers, like
> > building and co-ordinating the operation of the global Internet prior
> > to, say 1995 or 1996,
>
> 1) In 95/96 there was a paid IANA staff, though it is true that a lot
> of work was done by people who were paid under rather non-specific
> contracts.
[SNIP]

>
> > What is even MORE amazing is that the US $ 5 million  is just the tip of
> > the iceberg.
>
> No, it is not amazing at all.  If anything, given the demands made on
> ICANN, it is amazingly *cheap*.  As an end user, this is working out to
> around $.20/domain name per year (3% of the dominant wholesale cost) to
> pay for the global coordination functions that ICANN provides.

Dear Kent,

This is rubbish (and you af all should know),

As far as TLD's is concerned, ICANN/IANA is (only) managing a database with
+250 entries !!!!
I (for one) run a similar thing with +370.000 entries for around USD 3 mil.!

Regards
Per Kølle
.DK

>
>
> --
> Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
> [email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
> --

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 10:57:37 -0600
From: [email-masked] (Kristy McKee)
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

At 08:19 AM 3/8/2002 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 06:32:38AM -0500, Peter de Blanc wrote:
> > It is truely amazing that something once  done by volunteers, like
> > building and co-ordinating the operation of the global Internet prior
> > to, say 1995 or 1996,
>
>1) In 95/96 there was a paid IANA staff, though it is true that a lot
>of work was done by people who were paid under rather non-specific
>contracts.
>2) If you actually accounted for the time spent by the volunteers and
>paid staff, and paid for it, the amount would have been considerable.
>3) The internet was very much smaller in 1995, no matter how you measure
>it, and was far more US centric than it is now.
>4) and moreover: the complexity of the things that IANA/ICANN does don't
>scale linearly with the size of the Internet.
>
> > now costs over US $ 5 million per year to sustain
> > a bureaucracy that did not exist prior to commercialization of the
> > Internet.
>
>The commercialization of the Internet changed things dramatically.
>Comparing things now with the way things were then is worse than useless
>-- it is positively misleading.  An Internet that is a fundamental part
>of the infrastructure of global civilization is a vastly different
>matter than the garden of eden days of the tiny non-commercial
>academic/government network it used to be.
>
>Moreover, the "bureaucracy" is here largely because of continual demands
>by people to expand it.
>
> > What is even MORE amazing is that the US $ 5 million  is just the tip of
> > the iceberg.
>
>No, it is not amazing at all.  If anything, given the demands made on
>ICANN, it is amazingly *cheap*.  As an end user, this is working out to
>around $.20/domain name per year (3% of the dominant wholesale cost) to
>pay for the global coordination functions that ICANN provides.

Kent, your comments above seem unreasonable and incorrect to me.  In fact 
there were more Internet Service Providers and nearly the same amount of 
TLDs in 1995 as there are today...

If you are not speculating, I would appreciate reading evidence of at least 
the last sentence above.

Please show your work.

~k

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:22:30 -0800
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 05:40:25PM +0100, Per Koelle wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 06:32:38AM -0500, Peter de Blanc wrote:
> > > It is truely amazing that something once  done by volunteers, like
> > > building and co-ordinating the operation of the global Internet prior
> > > to, say 1995 or 1996,
> >
> > 1) In 95/96 there was a paid IANA staff, though it is true that a lot
> > of work was done by people who were paid under rather non-specific
> > contracts.
> [SNIP]
> 
> >
> > > What is even MORE amazing is that the US $ 5 million  is just the tip of
> > > the iceberg.
> >
> > No, it is not amazing at all.  If anything, given the demands made on
> > ICANN, it is amazingly *cheap*.  As an end user, this is working out to
> > around $.20/domain name per year (3% of the dominant wholesale cost) to
> > pay for the global coordination functions that ICANN provides.
> 
> Dear Kent,
> 
> This is rubbish (and you af all should know),

No, it is not rubbish.

> As far as TLD's is concerned, ICANN/IANA is (only) managing a database with
> +250 entries !!!!

That is an egregious oversimplification.  The root zone is not just any
old database, ICANN/IANA is providing management for a database that the
entire world is using, and that the whole world cares a lot about.  That
is a *vastly* more complicated thing than "only managing a database". 

> I (for one) run a similar thing with +370.000 entries for around USD 3 mil.!

If all *you* were doing was managing a database with 370,000 entries,
then $ 3Mil is *way* too much.  A database with 370000 entries is really
fairly small as databases go -- I personally could manage a database
like that for a very *very* tiny fraction of $3mil.   

The reason it costs you $3mil to run your database has almost nothing to
do with the size of your database -- the cost is caused almost entirely
by other factors.  Similarly, the costs to ICANN/IANA for running the
root zone have essentially nothing to do with the size of root zone. 

Regards

Kent

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 11:39:24 -0600
From: [email-masked] (Kristy McKee)
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

After reading both, the mission referred to by Alexander (below) and that 
written by Karl (below).  I certainly find more value in Karl's.

Karl included what is necessary to accomplish the non-technical goals set 
forth in the white paper, while the other overcomplicated each portion of 
action necessary...  and added procedures to processes that were once 
streamlined and should be again...

:)

~k

At 02:47 AM 3/8/2002 -0800, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
> > ICANN Staff Draft: Toward a Statement of the ICANN Mission (7 March 2002)
> > http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm
>...
> > What ICANN Does
>
>Which is quite a different matter than what ICANN ought to do.
>
>I won't be nearly as prolix as ICANN's staff.  One could presume that
>their salaries are based on the word count of their productions. ;-)
>
>Here's my rather shorter list of things that ICANN ought to do.  Please
>pardon the shorthand form.
>
>                 --karl--
>
>1 Allocation of IP addresses
>
>1.1 Is a very complex issue
>
>1.1.1 it is a mix of technical and economic factors and there is very
>little understanding of these issues outside of those who are directly
>involved in the address allocation or routing systems of the Internet.
>
>1.1.1.1 The economic ramifications are generally under appreciated.
>
>1.2 The most basic goal is adherence to the principles of CIDR.
>
>2 DNS Tasks
>
>2.1 Hint file publication
>
>2.2 Root zone entry admission and maintenance (i.e. who gets an entry in
>the root zone and to where should the delegation records point.)
>
>2.3 Periodic root zone file construction, distribution, disaster data
>preservation.
>
>2.4 Root server operation (direct or indirect)
>
>2.5 Root server placement (involves question of "anycast" routing
>technology.)
>
>2.6 Root zone dissemination
>
>2.7 Failure/error monitoring
>
>2.8 Preservation of historical versions of zone files/delegations.
>
>2.9 Huge open question: To what extent should ICANN reach into TLD
>registration systems?
>
>2.9.1 Most basic: escrow/data protection and recovery
>
>2.9.2 Less basic: whois gathering and accuracy
>
>2.9.3 Registry-registrar protocols
>
>2.9.3.1 (Note, registry/registrar model is not only one possible.  E.g. it
>is possible to represent domain name "ownership" by a digital certificate
>[non-repudiation of transfers requires support from by a transfer agent
>[who needs not know the subject matter of the certificate], much like a
>"bearer bond".)
>
>2.9.4 Least basic: DNS consumer rights, UDRP
>
>
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 10:10:20 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

POLICY  is what Kent is saying.
eric

Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 05:40:25PM +0100, Per Koelle wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Kent Crispin wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 06:32:38AM -0500, Peter de Blanc wrote:
> > > > It is truely amazing that something once  done by volunteers, like
> > > > building and co-ordinating the operation of the global Internet prior
> > > > to, say 1995 or 1996,
> > >
> > > 1) In 95/96 there was a paid IANA staff, though it is true that a lot
> > > of work was done by people who were paid under rather non-specific
> > > contracts.
> > [SNIP]
> >
> > >
> > > > What is even MORE amazing is that the US $ 5 million  is just the tip of
> > > > the iceberg.
> > >
> > > No, it is not amazing at all.  If anything, given the demands made on
> > > ICANN, it is amazingly *cheap*.  As an end user, this is working out to
> > > around $.20/domain name per year (3% of the dominant wholesale cost) to
> > > pay for the global coordination functions that ICANN provides.
> >
> > Dear Kent,
> >
> > This is rubbish (and you af all should know),
>
> No, it is not rubbish.
>
> > As far as TLD's is concerned, ICANN/IANA is (only) managing a database with
> > +250 entries !!!!
>
> That is an egregious oversimplification.  The root zone is not just any
> old database, ICANN/IANA is providing management for a database that the
> entire world is using, and that the whole world cares a lot about.  That
> is a *vastly* more complicated thing than "only managing a database".
>
> > I (for one) run a similar thing with +370.000 entries for around USD 3 mil.!
>
> If all *you* were doing was managing a database with 370,000 entries,
> then $ 3Mil is *way* too much.  A database with 370000 entries is really
> fairly small as databases go -- I personally could manage a database
> like that for a very *very* tiny fraction of $3mil.
>
> The reason it costs you $3mil to run your database has almost nothing to
> do with the size of your database -- the cost is caused almost entirely
> by other factors.  Similarly, the costs to ICANN/IANA for running the
> root zone have essentially nothing to do with the size of root zone.
>
> Regards
>
> Kent
>
> --
> Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
> [email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 19:10:35 +0100 (MET)
From: Elisabeth Porteneuve <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

Thank you very much Karl for this excellent synthesis.

I add:

1.3 IPv6 deployment

Elisabeth Porteneuve
- --

- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 02:47:11 -0800 (PST)
To: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement
From: "Karl Auerbach" <[email-masked]>
X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/0.48 (Python 2.2 on linux2)

On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Alexander Svensson wrote:

> ICANN Staff Draft: Toward a Statement of the ICANN Mission (7 March 2002)
> http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm
...
> What ICANN Does

Which is quite a different matter than what ICANN ought to do.

I won't be nearly as prolix as ICANN's staff.  One could presume that
their salaries are based on the word count of their productions. ;-)

Here's my rather shorter list of things that ICANN ought to do.  Please 
pardon the shorthand form.

		--karl--

1 Allocation of IP addresses

1.1 Is a very complex issue

1.1.1 it is a mix of technical and economic factors and there is very
little understanding of these issues outside of those who are directly
involved in the address allocation or routing systems of the Internet.

1.1.1.1 The economic ramifications are generally under appreciated.

1.2 The most basic goal is adherence to the principles of CIDR.

2 DNS Tasks

2.1 Hint file publication

2.2 Root zone entry admission and maintenance (i.e. who gets an entry in
the root zone and to where should the delegation records point.)

2.3 Periodic root zone file construction, distribution, disaster data
preservation.

2.4 Root server operation (direct or indirect)

2.5 Root server placement (involves question of "anycast" routing
technology.)

2.6 Root zone dissemination

2.7 Failure/error monitoring

2.8 Preservation of historical versions of zone files/delegations.

2.9 Huge open question: To what extent should ICANN reach into TLD
registration systems?

2.9.1 Most basic: escrow/data protection and recovery

2.9.2 Less basic: whois gathering and accuracy

2.9.3 Registry-registrar protocols

2.9.3.1 (Note, registry/registrar model is not only one possible.  E.g. it
is possible to represent domain name "ownership" by a digital certificate
[non-repudiation of transfers requires support from by a transfer agent
[who needs not know the subject matter of the certificate], much like a
"bearer bond".)

2.9.4 Least basic: DNS consumer rights, UDRP

- --
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:37:39 -0800 (PST)
From: Rick Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

Elisabeth,

why would you add "IPv6 deployment?" How is it ICANN or IANA's job to
become an advocate of a addressing scheme?

- -rick

On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:

>
>
> Thank you very much Karl for this excellent synthesis.
>
> I add:
>
> 1.3 IPv6 deployment
>
> Elisabeth Porteneuve
> --
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 02:47:11 -0800 (PST)
> To: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
> cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement
> From: "Karl Auerbach" <[email-masked]>
> X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/0.48 (Python 2.2 on linux2)
>
> On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
> > ICANN Staff Draft: Toward a Statement of the ICANN Mission (7 March 2002)
> > http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm
> ...
> > What ICANN Does
>
> Which is quite a different matter than what ICANN ought to do.
>
> I won't be nearly as prolix as ICANN's staff.  One could presume that
> their salaries are based on the word count of their productions. ;-)
>
> Here's my rather shorter list of things that ICANN ought to do.  Please
> pardon the shorthand form.
>
> 		--karl--
>
> 1 Allocation of IP addresses
>
> 1.1 Is a very complex issue
>
> 1.1.1 it is a mix of technical and economic factors and there is very
> little understanding of these issues outside of those who are directly
> involved in the address allocation or routing systems of the Internet.
>
> 1.1.1.1 The economic ramifications are generally under appreciated.
>
> 1.2 The most basic goal is adherence to the principles of CIDR.
>
> 2 DNS Tasks
>
> 2.1 Hint file publication
>
> 2.2 Root zone entry admission and maintenance (i.e. who gets an entry in
> the root zone and to where should the delegation records point.)
>
> 2.3 Periodic root zone file construction, distribution, disaster data
> preservation.
>
> 2.4 Root server operation (direct or indirect)
>
> 2.5 Root server placement (involves question of "anycast" routing
> technology.)
>
> 2.6 Root zone dissemination
>
> 2.7 Failure/error monitoring
>
> 2.8 Preservation of historical versions of zone files/delegations.
>
> 2.9 Huge open question: To what extent should ICANN reach into TLD
> registration systems?
>
> 2.9.1 Most basic: escrow/data protection and recovery
>
> 2.9.2 Less basic: whois gathering and accuracy
>
> 2.9.3 Registry-registrar protocols
>
> 2.9.3.1 (Note, registry/registrar model is not only one possible.  E.g. it
> is possible to represent domain name "ownership" by a digital certificate
> [non-repudiation of transfers requires support from by a transfer agent
> [who needs not know the subject matter of the certificate], much like a
> "bearer bond".)
>
> 2.9.4 Least basic: DNS consumer rights, UDRP
>
>
> --
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:42:33 -0800 (PST)
From: "Karl Auerbach" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:

> Thank you very much Karl for this excellent synthesis.
> 
> I add:
> 
> 1.3 IPv6 deployment

That is an excellent addition.  Well more than a year ago I tried to get 
ICANN interested in the question of what enhancements to 
registry/registrar systems and protocols and to whois would be required to 
support IPv6, in particular the registration of domains having IPv6 
based DNS servers.  Because at the time there was a relative complex DNS 
Resource Record (A6) being proposed in the IETF the changes required 
could have been rather more than a mild extension of the current systems.

I hope that Rick Wesson will pop up and let us know the status of this.

Going beyond IPv6...

One of the interesting parts about "staff"s list is the number of 
functions that derive from the performance of the IANA contract, a 
contract under which ICANN receives no revenue.  In other words ICANN 
provides IANA as a gift to the US government and the costs are covered by 
ICANN's other revenue streams.

So far, due to management stonewalling, I have been unsucessful in
obtaining any information from ICANN management about the scope of the
expense to deliver the IANA functions.  From "staff" list it is pretty
clear that it amounts to a reasonably large chunk of ICANN's overall
costs.

With ICANN and IANA sharing the same roof, the responsibility for many
decisions is at best vague and uncertain.

To my mind it would be best if ICANN and IANA were to be separated. The US
Government should seek to place those tasks with some other body.

		--karl--

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 13:54:58 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> 
> No, it is not amazing at all.  If anything, given the demands made on
> ICANN, it is amazingly *cheap*.  As an end user, this is working out to
> around $.20/domain name per year (3% of the dominant wholesale cost) to
> pay for the global coordination functions that ICANN provides.

Interesting that Mr. Crispin defines "end user" as domain
name registrants.

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 14:34:19 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

Hugh Blair wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > On Behalf Of Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >
> > Kent Crispin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > No, it is not amazing at all.  If anything, given the demands made on
> > > ICANN, it is amazingly *cheap*.  As an end user, this is working out to
> > > around $.20/domain name per year (3% of the dominant wholesale cost) to
> > > pay for the global coordination functions that ICANN provides.
> >
> > Interesting that Mr. Crispin defines "end user" as domain
> > name registrants.
> 
> And yet we get no voice. Yep, that sure makes sense.

Oh, but the plan is to give every Tom, Dick, and Harriet
with an email address a token voice... doesn't that
satisfy?

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 14:46:12 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

Hugh Blair wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >
> > Hugh Blair wrote:
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > On Behalf Of Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> > > >
> > > > Kent Crispin wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > No, it is not amazing at all.  If anything, given the demands made on
> > > > > ICANN, it is amazingly *cheap*.  As an end user, this is working out to
> > > > > around $.20/domain name per year (3% of the dominant wholesale cost) to
> > > > > pay for the global coordination functions that ICANN provides.
> > > >
> > > > Interesting that Mr. Crispin defines "end user" as domain
> > > > name registrants.
> > >
> > > And yet we get no voice. Yep, that sure makes sense.
> >
> > Oh, but the plan is to give every Tom, Dick, and Harriet
> > with an email address a token voice... doesn't that
> > satisfy?
> 
> Sotiris, you're being too restrictive. The 'plan' is to give every *person* a
> token voice. Let's not crowd out those that surf the 'net in libraries, see
> billboards with dot com addresses, or read magazines that mention
> the 'net. They -also- should be included.  Just having a hotmail/yahoo
> email address isn't enough, the whole world should be involved. Not too
> directly though, we don't want to slow down any proccesses at ICANN.
> <grin>

ALM: recyclable revenue scheme for Big Brother ICANN?

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 15:17:31 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

Karl and all assembly members,

  Good short list Karl!  Well done!

  I have a few questions for you Karl, or anyone else here in the
GA assembly that might have some thoughts or potential
answers/opinions.

 To add to you list Karl I had these thoughts.  Consider them questions.

1.)  UDRP(s) - Is there a absolute need, or is it even open to question
as to whether of not a single UDRp should be used to handle
Domain Name disputes?
1.1) Should a UDRP be used to deal with Registrar/Registry
disputes for Transfer and delete issues?
1.2) Is the UDRP(s?) a DNSO issue and should the board consider
them such?  Should the DNSO GA have a position on UDRP(s),
and should that position be determined by the GA members?

2.) Should the At-Large, should there ever be one, be able to vote
     on policies or proposals of policy for management of IP address
     management, DNS management, and Protocol standards, or should
     the representatives elected by the At-Large act in their behalf
     on ALL IP, DNS, and Protocol issues?

3.) Should there be a central WHOIS, and is this an ICANN
     Board or staff level decision?  Whom should determine
     what information is displayed in a WHOIS lookup, the
     BoD or staff, or the stakeholders...??

4.) In a very broad sense, should stakeholders have a direct
     vote/decision on any of the IP, DNS, or Protocol practices
     and/or policies?

Karl Auerbach wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
> > ICANN Staff Draft: Toward a Statement of the ICANN Mission (7 March 2002)
> > http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm
> ...
> > What ICANN Does
>
> Which is quite a different matter than what ICANN ought to do.
>
> I won't be nearly as prolix as ICANN's staff.  One could presume that
> their salaries are based on the word count of their productions. ;-)
>
> Here's my rather shorter list of things that ICANN ought to do.  Please
> pardon the shorthand form.
>
>                 --karl--
>
> 1 Allocation of IP addresses
>
> 1.1 Is a very complex issue
>
> 1.1.1 it is a mix of technical and economic factors and there is very
> little understanding of these issues outside of those who are directly
> involved in the address allocation or routing systems of the Internet.
>
> 1.1.1.1 The economic ramifications are generally under appreciated.
>
> 1.2 The most basic goal is adherence to the principles of CIDR.
>
> 2 DNS Tasks
>
> 2.1 Hint file publication
>
> 2.2 Root zone entry admission and maintenance (i.e. who gets an entry in
> the root zone and to where should the delegation records point.)
>
> 2.3 Periodic root zone file construction, distribution, disaster data
> preservation.
>
> 2.4 Root server operation (direct or indirect)
>
> 2.5 Root server placement (involves question of "anycast" routing
> technology.)
>
> 2.6 Root zone dissemination
>
> 2.7 Failure/error monitoring
>
> 2.8 Preservation of historical versions of zone files/delegations.
>
> 2.9 Huge open question: To what extent should ICANN reach into TLD
> registration systems?
>
> 2.9.1 Most basic: escrow/data protection and recovery
>
> 2.9.2 Less basic: whois gathering and accuracy
>
> 2.9.3 Registry-registrar protocols
>
> 2.9.3.1 (Note, registry/registrar model is not only one possible.  E.g. it
> is possible to represent domain name "ownership" by a digital certificate
> [non-repudiation of transfers requires support from by a transfer agent
> [who needs not know the subject matter of the certificate], much like a
> "bearer bond".)
>
> 2.9.4 Least basic: DNS consumer rights, UDRP
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 15:21:29 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

Peter and all assembly members,

  Not only do your ccTLD colleagues agree with you, so do I
and a huge number of our members, as well as many on this
forum, from what I can tell.

Peter de Blanc wrote:

> It is truely amazing that something once  done by volunteers, like
> building and co-ordinating the operation of the global Internet prior
> to, say 1995 or 1996, now costs over US $ 5 million per year to sustain
> a bureaucracy that did not exist prior to commercialization of the
> Internet.
>
> What is even MORE amazing is that the US $ 5 million  is just the tip of
> the iceberg. Frankly, I do not see the need to pay so much for so
> little. Like there is not even a QoS guarantee on the operation of the
> root server system.
>
> Many of my ccTLD colleagues agree with me.
>
> Peter de Blanc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Karl
> Auerbach
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:47 AM
> To: Alexander Svensson
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement
>
> On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Alexander Svensson wrote:
>
> > ICANN Staff Draft: Toward a Statement of the ICANN Mission (7 March
> > 2002)
> > http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm
> ....
> > What ICANN Does
>
> Which is quite a different matter than what ICANN ought to do.
>
> I won't be nearly as prolix as ICANN's staff.  One could presume that
> their salaries are based on the word count of their productions. ;-)
>
> Here's my rather shorter list of things that ICANN ought to do.  Please
> pardon the shorthand form.
>
>                 --karl--
>
> 1 Allocation of IP addresses
>
> 1.1 Is a very complex issue
>
> 1.1.1 it is a mix of technical and economic factors and there is very
> little understanding of these issues outside of those who are directly
> involved in the address allocation or routing systems of the Internet.
>
> 1.1.1.1 The economic ramifications are generally under appreciated.
>
> 1.2 The most basic goal is adherence to the principles of CIDR.
>
> 2 DNS Tasks
>
> 2.1 Hint file publication
>
> 2.2 Root zone entry admission and maintenance (i.e. who gets an entry in
> the root zone and to where should the delegation records point.)
>
> 2.3 Periodic root zone file construction, distribution, disaster data
> preservation.
>
> 2.4 Root server operation (direct or indirect)
>
> 2.5 Root server placement (involves question of "anycast" routing
> technology.)
>
> 2.6 Root zone dissemination
>
> 2.7 Failure/error monitoring
>
> 2.8 Preservation of historical versions of zone files/delegations.
>
> 2.9 Huge open question: To what extent should ICANN reach into TLD
> registration systems?
>
> 2.9.1 Most basic: escrow/data protection and recovery
>
> 2.9.2 Less basic: whois gathering and accuracy
>
> 2.9.3 Registry-registrar protocols
>
> 2.9.3.1 (Note, registry/registrar model is not only one possible.  E.g.
> it is possible to represent domain name "ownership" by a digital
> certificate [non-repudiation of transfers requires support from by a
> transfer agent [who needs not know the subject matter of the
> certificate], much like a "bearer bond".)
>
> 2.9.4 Least basic: DNS consumer rights, UDRP
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1069
*************************