>The only issues we have to ensure are that the policies
>are adhered to, and that the software works.  That's
>what we should be doing. Its up to the market to decide
>the rest.

I strongly agree with your mail (not just the bit quoted above, all of it). 

And a note to Leni - the full quote is "Rough consensus and running code" -
and the full quotation is relevant here. The running code is DNA
queueing/update synchronisation software. The rough consensus is (in my
view), just needs to be as simple as

	(a) a commitment to support and use the software for coordinating
operations between DNA's in the same name space
	(b) a commitment to respect and be bound by the policies defined by ADNA
related to acceptable practice as an operational DNA (for instance -
respecting the current naming policy in each domain ; not hoarding names
internally to the DNA ; abiding by whatever dispute resolution mechanism
ADNA wants to mandate)

Here are some words I like (I just made 'em up but I like 'em):

"ADNA will process applications from potential DNA's without predjudice,
and with a commitment to ensure that no sincere application will be
unreasonably refused entry". 

I wonder if anyone else likes this.

Alternatively we can raise so many barriers that only Melbourne IT and
existing national ISP's are large enough to meet the selection criteria.
Surely that's not the intent?

Simon

Simon

---
Simon Hackett, Technical Director, Internode Systems Pty Ltd
31 York St [PO Box 284, Rundle Mall], Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: simon§internode.com.au  Web: http://www.on.net
Phone: +61-8-8223-2999          Fax: +61-8-8223-1777