Re: DNS: ADNA's first decisions - Minuted

Re: DNS: ADNA's first decisions - Minuted

From: David Keegel <djk§>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 11:38:57 +1000 (EST)
] [Leni Mayo said:]
] >Seems like there are at least two middle-ground areas:
] >i)  the initial focus of ADNA
] >ii) representation within ADNA
] >
] >"" might be a good starting point on (i)

/* It's good to see that the message is starting to sink in */

] > but how about broadening it to a notion "commercial domains within .au"?  

Simon Hackett wrote:
] In my opinion, not at this time. There are two reasons:
] - Defining "commercial domains in .au" is deceptively hard to do. The only
] exception is where there is no dispute that it is a 100% commercial
] domain in .AU.
] - It is not necessary, nor desirable, for ADNA to control all "commercial
] domains in .AU" in the first instance. The universally agreed point of
] urgency is 'fixing' 
] So - lets do it.

I would tend to agree with Simon -- let's just start with

But I would also suggest that in fairness to the DNA of, we
look a little beyond the short term and start to pencil in some sort
of "in principle" suggestion that, once has been `fixed' and
it has been demonstrated that the solution is working (initially),
we then also turn to and decide whether that is a commercial
domain (which I think it is mostly now) and if so negotiate with
stakeholders (especially the owner and the operator of to
seek to implement the solution (or a variant of it) in also.

Regarding new commercial domains, I would suggest that we put on
hold suggestions such as (for example) until/unless it is
determined that the objectives of cannot be met by reform
within (eg: having multiple competitive DNAs within

I haven't looked in detail at other suggestions for new domains
within au, but I'd propose that consideration of the suggestions 
should also wait until we see what can be done in  It may
be that if is `fixed', then these domains are not needed.

As people have been pointing out "rough consensus and running code"
is a cornerstone for change in many Internet processes such IETF.
I think it would be quite reasonable for the owner of to want
to see both before agreeing to actual (as opposed to "in principle")
changes in

In this case "running code" translates to seeing processes that work.

And I think we will find if ADNA sets out a timetable something like
	phase 1:  fix problem
	phase 2:  generalise to other commercial au domains.
	phase 3:  new *.au domains, overall au, legal stuff, etc
	phase 4:  all things to all australians (ie: ADNA's Objects)
then we will see a "rough consensus" emerge from that.

I'm looking at phase 1 and 2 being fairly short term, perhaps (at a
wild guess) three months and six months from now respectively.
David Keegel <djk&#167;>  +61 3 9642-5997
Cybersource P/L: Unix Systems Administration and TCP/IP network management
Received on Sun Jun 29 1997 - 12:02:34 UTC

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