Danny and all, You and I know that ICANN has always had trouble maintaining it's own web site let alone provisioning it's DNS or advising on how to do so for or to others. Additionally, until recently ICANN.ORG's own DNS was grossly misconfigured. That does not lend much in terms of creditability to ICANN's ability to manage any resource effectively. Secondly, in either 1999 or 2000, I don't recall offhand at the moment, the than sitting ICANN interim Bod was very emphatic that if any registry failed, ICANN itself would take over so that no registrant would be damaged as a result of such a failure. Ergo you are quite right in being concerned, if not very concerned regarding fail over from http://www.icann.org/registries/failover/icann-aar-06apr08.pdf slide 13. Seems some backpedalling is in progress, behind the scenes... IMO only, what should be done to address the failure of .Travel is either ICON hire some other entity to temporarily manage the registry, or aid the current registry owners to acquire funding with ICANN itself kicking in about 25%. But frankly, .Travel has little chance of survival unless it receives significant and long term public funding. In the current world economic environment I don't see that happening either... -----Original Message-----

From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> Sent: May 29, 2008 12:54 PM To: JFC Morfin <jefsey@jefsey.com>, At-Large Worldwide <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: Edward Hasbrouck <edward@hasbrouck.org> Subject: Re: [At-Large] The pending death of a registry

Jefsey,

Of greater concern to me than the prospect of ALAC registry management is the current status of the ICANN Registry failover project -- see http://www.icann.org/registries/failover/registry-failover-30apr08.pdf

See also the After Action Report for the gTLD Registry Failover Exercise conducted 24-25 January 2008http://www.icann.org/registries/failover/icann-aar-06apr08.pdf

See also the SSAC Review of the above at http://www.icann.org/committees/security/sac031.pdf

By the way, on one of the slides from the first presentation (page 13) there is a bullet point that states: "Recognition that current process is not sufficient to reconstitute a registry". This is a somewhat unsettling remark (unless I am misunderstanding it).

Another troubling statement from the After Action report: "The draft ICANN gTLD Registry Failover Plan provides strategic guidance, but (by design) lacks the detailed internal ICANN event-specific steps for implementation."

One has to hope that behind-the-scenes ICANN is reasonably on top of their responsibilities... the last thing that we need is a loss of confidence in the provisioning of DNS services.

_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827