[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (?) Standards set for registering Net domain names
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 22:00:56 -0800 (PST)
- From: "William X. Walsh" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: (?) Standards set for registering Net domain names
On 11-Mar-99 Dean Robb wrote:
> Agreed. Off the top, I'd think that requiring a "startup" registrar to
> maintain complete off-site backups that are not under their direct control
> would minimize the impact of their going under. And businesses don't fail
> overnight...it's almost always a slide with plenty of warning signs.
I don't think this is that unreasonable. We are now pricing for an east coast
colocation (our main servers are in San Jose, CA and Fresno, CA) and was able
to find that we can colocate (or even lease) a backup mirror server rather
I also like the idea of the bond/insurance for fund operations, but I think the
amounts are rather inordinate. Quite simply it should take no more than 10,000
to 25,000 dollars to fund the TECHNICAL operations of the registry (remember,
we are not talking the bulky and badly setup NSI type registry, but a much more
streamlined, efficient, and secured registry, most likely using a web based
interface). All that the funding is required for is to keep the technical
operations working for existing customers (funding a process for new customers
of an insolvent registry is not necessary and excessive. the operation that
takes over financial responsibility and control will have to be able to handle
that once the term of the insolvency bond funded contract expire).
Even a small non-profit or limited profit model registry could afford that
level of insurance.
Anything more is just an artificial barrier to entry.
E-Mail: William X. Walsh <email@example.com>
"We may well be on our way to a society overrun by hordes
of lawyers, hungry as locusts."
- Chief Justice Warren Burger, US Supreme Court, 1977