Re: DNS: ADNA's claim to .AU

Re: DNS: ADNA's claim to .AU

From: Michael Malone <mmalone§>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 18:38:33 +0800

The real issue here is exactly this:

1) ISOC-AU wants to be the policy oversight body for .AU.

2) ISOC-AU does not want anyone else to claim to be the
   policy oversight body for .AU, since it conflicts with (1)

ISOC-AU needs to accept that:

1) ISOC-AU is not representative of the broader Internet community.
   It represents an important segment, but not every interest.

2) ISOC-AU has a valuable contribution to make as a technical body
   and its input it valued, but certainly not the only valued opinion.

3) As long as any body I am involved in has a say in the process,
   ISOC-AU will never be the body actually running .AU

4) To achieve a solution, of any kind, ISOC-AU is itself going
   to have to cooperate with other bodies.  This may be difficult,
   since it "gives credibility to their claim", but that's life.

You're not the only stake holder guys!  People have bent over
backwards to accomodate ISOC-AU's views, but let's face it: you
don't want to know.  You just want to disrupt the process, so
that you can take it on yourselves.

Instead of saying "We disagree with ADNA", I'd encourage you to
remember that ADNA is itself a consortium of Internet related

> According to statements, formal and informal, made by those driving ADNA, it
> is currently ADNA's intention to be the top level policy and oversight body
> for the .AU namespace,

Correct.  That is the ultimate goal of ADNA.  Its why it was
created.  However, it is understood that at this time, the
body should be directing its attention to commercial services,
since this is where the current perceived problems exist.  It
also gives ADNA a chance to show that it -is- the correct
body to tackle this job.

>  - ADNA is commercially focussed; this focus is not appropriate for a
>    top-level policy and oversight body

Several of the bodies involved in ADNA are commercially focussed.
However, the task it has taken on is not a commercial one.  Your
claim here is akin to me saying "ISOC is commercially focussed,
since all its members have jobs".

Some of the members of ADNA are commercially focussed.  Certainly
not all.  However, these bodies have gotten together to work on
a task that is not commercial.

At ISOC-AU's insistance, ADNA has focussed itself on commercial
domain name allocation.  Now you are criticising us for it?  ISOC-AU
is rapidly losing credibility.

>  - ADNA is not representative of the wider Australian Internet community
>    and structurally incapable of becoming so

Ah.  But ISOC is.  

Need I recite the current list of members of ADNA yet again?  It
is representative already of a sizable proportion of Internet
users, and more important, it is capable of gaining further
representation from other key stakeholders.

>  - ADNA does not have the general support of the Australian Internet
>    community and should not lay claim to .AU until it does.

Do you somehow believe that saying this over and over again will
make it true?  If ISOC-AU stopped bleating, then we could get on
with the task.  Instead, ISOC-AU is posturing wildly, hoping to
derail the process, so that ISOC-AU can take it on.

> lack of support by ... several DNS delegates


> ADNA may yet evolve to be appropriate for .AU, though big changes will be
> needed. Right now it is NOT appropriate. Why not acknowledge that and work
> *together* with your detractors to change things?

Good lord.  Do you think we would be putting this much effort
into answering your every message if we weren't interested
in working together?

What exactly do you want?

I believe that ADNA may evolve to be appropriate for .AU.  I agree
that big changes will have to be made.

I don't think -anyone- has argued this point.  However, for all its
protestations, ISOC-AU seems unable to make any constructive suggestions
for change.  Your only comments to date have been "ADNA has no claim
to .AU" and "ADNA is not representative".

Make some specific suggestions, and -then- you may be taken seriously.

Let's say your specific suggestion is "ISOC-AU requests that Michael
Malone step down from the board of ADNA.  At that point, ISOC-AU
would involve itself in the process".  Where do I sign?  Honestly
guys.  We just want this thing to work, and right now, the energy
invested in arguing would be better focussed on the task at hand.

Received on Fri Jun 27 1997 - 21:10:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:02 UTC