Re: [DNS] the road ahead

Re: [DNS] the road ahead

From: David Keegel <djk§>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 01:27:15 +1000 (EST)
David Keegel wrote:

] >if you don't focus on the main game in a mailing list, you will
] >not get anything done in that list.
] >If everybody could ask themselves "Does this message I am composing
] >help progress towards competition in" before sending each
] >and every message to this list, I would be a very happy man indeed.

Doug Osborn wrote on Jun 24 :-
] Is that the "main game"?

I think it is.  I think if we can get a good solution for, I am
very confident it would also be applied to in pretty short order
(if not at the same time as  But you have to get a specific
proposal on the table before you start looking for definite commitments.
] The issues are surely wider than "let's get".

Undoubtedly there are more issues to be looked at.  Problem is, if you
try to look at all the issues at the same time, you end up with glacial
progress.  I can't speak for others, but I think there is a sense on
this list of "ADNA has had the ball for a while, and didn't do much
with it.  Let's make a new start and get something moving."

So, let's start with, and tackle any issues we need to along
the way, identify any other issues so that we can come back to them
after we have sorted out and (and any similar domains).

] How should the .au DNS be governed? What is an appropriate body to do it?

For the next year or two, I can't see why kre can't keep governing .au
itself, mainly in a "caretaker" capacity (that's all it needs).

Once we've sorted out, we will probably be in a better position to
answer those sorts of questions than we are now.  In the process, we will
likely learn a lot more about other stake-holders, to help things along.

] How do we fund the
] necessary infrastructure and not rely upon the donation of time and
] materials from individuals, universities and companies?

Again, this one can wait (and a solution might just drop out of the work
we are doing on

] If there should be competition, at what level
] should it be (eg the vaunted Nominet model)?

Here's an important question.  The Nominet model sounds good to me.
 David Keegel <djk&#167;>  URL:
Cybersource P/L: Unix Systems Administration and TCP/IP network management
Received on Wed Jul 01 1998 - 08:11:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC