Re: [NA-Discuss] Connecting.nyc Inc.- ALS Application 171
... this has been interesting to follow
I suggest that it is possible to do more -- within a narrow reading of the At Large advisory mission -- than just follow with interest. The requirements for new registries circa 2013/2014 are significantly higher than for registries new circa 2004/2005, or new circa 2001, or the subject of redelegations circa 2002 and 2004, and of course, registries pre-existing the transfer of the IANA Functions Contract from ISI to The New Entity. Independent of whether this raises competition policy concerns, these higher levels of requirements, some, in my view frivolous, e.g., ipv6 connectivity ab initio, zone signing ab initio, do not include geographic redundency, nor do they require, or merely offer guidance, on services which are in the public interest, and must, or should, be restored before services which are not. I do not claim that any redundency or order of illumination requirement will have a clear benefit when an operator is affected by an event such as the landfall of a hurricane, however, the experience of registrars located in the hurricane landfalls of Florida and Lousiana has been one of near-failure and near-miss, and it is only a matter of time until a registry is the subject of heroic efforts and/or failover programs. A redundency requirement and a critical operations first plan requirement would add to the technical, and policy cultures of stability and resiliency, and for that reason I suggest that advice is both now due, and prudent. Eric
I'll add it as a discussion item for Monday's call. While the news has covered storm damage and the suffering of folks in NY & NJ, few are aware that critical portions of our e-commerce have been kept alive with gasoline for a week. It would be an interesting statistic to see just how much gasoline... -------------------------------------------------- From: <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 1:57 PM To: <gbruen@knujon.com> Cc: <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Connecting.nyc Inc.- ALS Application 171
... this has been interesting to follow
I suggest that it is possible to do more -- within a narrow reading of the At Large advisory mission -- than just follow with interest.
The requirements for new registries circa 2013/2014 are significantly higher than for registries new circa 2004/2005, or new circa 2001, or the subject of redelegations circa 2002 and 2004, and of course, registries pre-existing the transfer of the IANA Functions Contract from ISI to The New Entity.
Independent of whether this raises competition policy concerns, these higher levels of requirements, some, in my view frivolous, e.g., ipv6 connectivity ab initio, zone signing ab initio, do not include geographic redundency, nor do they require, or merely offer guidance, on services which are in the public interest, and must, or should, be restored before services which are not.
I do not claim that any redundency or order of illumination requirement will have a clear benefit when an operator is affected by an event such as the landfall of a hurricane, however, the experience of registrars located in the hurricane landfalls of Florida and Lousiana has been one of near-failure and near-miss, and it is only a matter of time until a registry is the subject of heroic efforts and/or failover programs.
A redundency requirement and a critical operations first plan requirement would add to the technical, and policy cultures of stability and resiliency, and for that reason I suggest that advice is both now due, and prudent.
Eric
participants (2)
-
ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net -
Garth Bruen at Knujon.com