Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)

["Richard J. Sexton" <richard at sexton.com>]

At 05:40 PM 2/3/98 -0500, Jay at Iperdome.per wrote:
> At 12:38 PM 2/3/98 -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>As such, it is the position of many that the role of domain names in the
>>Internet infrastructure dictates that registries be operated in a strictly
>>cost-recovery basis and with direct public oversight.  One might debate the
>>details about different/better ways of implementing this, but the strategic
>>difference between allowing for-profit vs. non-profit is very much the
>>difference between pro-supplier and pro-consumer.
>>
>>I'll also note that the Magaziner Green Paper will provide no meaningful
>>oversight to the for-profit registries, thereby making their misbehavior
>>that much more likely.
>
>
>Ok Dave, I'll call your bluff.
>
>Are you suggesting that if I agree to change Iperdome into
>a not-for-profit corporation, that you and the MOUvement
>will support our entry into the root.  
>
>If this is all that it will take for us to gain entry into 
>the root, then I am prepared to take you up on your offer.  
>If not, then please clarify your position.

Ditto for VRx and the TLD's it currently operates in the
eDNS and Alternic servers. I've already announced on usenet
I was interested in using the "customer cooperative" model.

As for the oversight part, JF has what I think is a 
meritorius idea of having 8 trustees per TLD.

The "gougers and theives" argument was a straw-man argument
all along. There's a big difference between "wanting to 
make money like NSI" and "not real happy about the ITU
and WIPO's involvement in ANY aspect of inet infrastrucutre" 
and I hope that is finally becoming clear that opposition
to the MoU has motives other than profit.


--
                   ``It's too dark to put the keys in my ignition''  
 richard at sexton.com
 Bannockburn, Ontario, Canada +1 (613) 473-1719