On reflection, I think I agree completely with the comment below. Remember
that all competing DNA's in a given domain will be mirroring each others'
DNS data, so that there will be no *customer* impact if someone's DNS
server is shoddy (slow) - the answer will just get served back from a
faster one.

Let's enable competition, make sure that all DNA's sign up to an agreement
that says they'll abide by ADNA rules and regs as drafted and changed from
time to time (providing they are allowed input into those changes), and get
on with it.

Simon

At 17:19 22/07/97 +1000, Andrew Donald wrote:
>Look, this is out of control.  Who says that 300ms has any meaning to the
>people who will pay for the service?  What right do we have to determine
>what QoS they should get?  Surely that is what market forces are about.  I
>suggest we concentrate on enabling competition and paying customers will
>vote with their feet.  The only thing you can say about appropriate QoS is
>that market requirements will diverge counter-intuitively from your
>expectations.  All these QoS standards will achieve is make-work for more
>amateur bureaucrats.
>
>Andrew
>----------
>> From: Richard Archer <rha&#167;interdomain.net.au>
>> To: dns&#167;intiaa.asn.au
>> Subject: Re: DNS: Draft selection criteria for new DNAs and 2LDs
>> Date: Monday, 21 July 1997 17:59
>> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> 
>> At 17:00 +1000 21/7/97, Stephen Baxter wrote:
>> 
>> >> Good point - so why actually mandate this in the application at all
>then -
>> >> either you're going to require a serious level of connectivity (e.g. 2
>> >> mb/sec at a maximum of (say) 500 milliseconds from munnari.oz.au, or
>> >> whatever, or don't bother at all).
>> >>
>> >
>> >Something like the QoS in the TIS schedule is not bad. The DNA must be
>> >able to demonstate suitable Internet connectivity from munnari.oz.au
>with
>> >a packet return time not exceeding 300 milliseconds.
>> >Simple ping stats could be used as evidence of the above.
>> 
>> 
>> It would be better to monitor the time taken to answer a DNS query.
>> A machine may be able to respond quickly to pings, but still take a long
>> time to respond to a DNS query.
>> 
>> I agree that QoS is a better way to regulate the connectivity of the DNA
>> than link size. If a 2LD is only small, why should it be necessary to run
>a
>> 512k connection when a 64k link would offer the same quality of service?
>> 
>> 
>> Section 4 could become:
>> 
>> 4. Must have permanent connection to the Internet maintained such that
>the
>> DNA's name server can respond to DNS queries from munnari.oz.au with a
>> packet return time not exceeding 300 milliseconds.
>> 
>> 
>> Richard.
>> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: 2.6.3i
>> Charset: noconv
>> Comment: Public Key: <http://interdomain.net.au/~rha/pgpkey.txt>
>> 
>> iQCVAwUBM9MW2DXPU7enfNnZAQHtwgP/R22LmoOS/PL0gz55nBMnykdMZUZvNYjU
>> bxHrrAx/QbTMDvP3KcbbsDRP9jGeLdMWfcbCN7ES8xRNy76FUQLx1iTb0jz1KPwE
>> MNpkMzqASTaC43PzGHA3hGl6h+lNdqEOlDv61xkcY4GGDkBAcNKNtV30t/b5Jb+6
>> QpIm66SnSm4=
>> =BtS0
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> 
>
---
Simon Hackett, Technical Director, Internode Systems Pty Ltd
31 York St [PO Box 284, Rundle Mall], Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: simon&#167;internode.com.au  Web: http://www.on.net
Phone: +61-8-8223-2999          Fax: +61-8-8223-1777