Re: [At-Large] The pending death of a registry
JFC Morfin wrote:
This demonstrates what @large people engaged in this business and in DNS community testing know for years: Registries should be non profit organisations and the Registrants should be their members. Low management costs and new services.
Verisign is a successful and purely commercial operation. So is Afilias. The failure is not linked to the fact that it was a commercial company. IMHO, the main issue is that the ".travel" string is only meaningful for English speakers, or about 30% of the current Internet users. I cannot see why German, Spanish or French speakers would use such a domain.
PS. By the way how many people on this ALAC list has ever technical managed DNS zone files and operated a nameserver ? I would be curiouis to know also how many people among the GNSO and BoD?
FWIW, I do. -- Patrick Vande Walle Check my blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu
At 21:26 29/05/2008, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
JFC Morfin wrote:
This demonstrates what @large people engaged in this business and in DNS community testing know for years: Registries should be non profit organisations and the Registrants should be their members. Low management costs and new services.
Verisign is a successful and purely commercial operation. So is Afilias.
This is true, but look at the cost for the Internet community? Verisign and Afilias need the root server system. Question is: does the Internet need it? To anwser that question, I read IAB's RFC 3869, ICANN ICP-3, and Versign's commitments when they were confirmed ".com". I saw no DNS test-bed as requested by ICANN. Neither by Verisign, no by IETF (I called upon a few times in vain). So, I organised and ran a community test, as per ICANN's requirements. I got upto 30 machines, from most of the parts of the world, for nearly two years. No commercial operation ever helped us. We only were @large people (you know those who do not exist). We fully documented the test-bed on-line and to EU, ITU, Geant, etc. This is why we know why we agree with the IAB.
The failure is not linked to the fact that it was a commercial company. IMHO, the main issue is that the ".travel" string is only meaningful for English speakers, or about 30% of the current Internet users. I cannot see why German, Spanish or French speakers would use such a domain.
The same as I do not see why Chinese would use ASCII user names. 30% seems to be an high figure. But let accept it. It certainly represents a wider market than many ccTLDs. However, ccTLDs use to be in name registration service. Did you go the http://www.travel site and tried to register a name? These people are in the money wasting business.
PS. By the way how many people on this ALAC list has ever technical managed DNS zone files and operated a nameserver ? I would be curious to know also how many people among the GNSO and BoD?
FWIW, I do.
Good! This will help : I suppose the most important thing for @large people this year may be to get familiar with Unbound, its extensions and the resulting impact on the Internet community. Because I feel the BoD will need to know about it. Are there others? jfc
participants (2)
-
JFC Morfin -
Patrick Vande Walle