Confusing the DNS (was: Re: [wg-c] Straw Vote)

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

 >     To: "Rita M. Odin" <OdinR@arentfox.com>, wg-c@dnso.org, 
weinberg@mail.msen.com
 >     Subject: Re: [wg-c] Straw Vote
 >     From: "A.M. Rutkowski" <amr@netmagic.com>
 >     Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 19:35:56 -0400
 >
 >We've been down this path before.  In 1992, elaborate rules
 >were developed for domain name registrations for the "de jure"
 >domain name system by a public advisory committee that met for

The system referenced was a name system, but it was not called a domain 
name system and it had nothing at all to do with the current 
DNS.  Continued reference to it as a domain name system serves only to 
confuse the discussion.

 >Ultimately we're dealing with some tradeoffs here regarding
 >administrative overhead and associated costs.  So the bottom
 >line is that when your suggestion was followed - the burdens
 >were so great that the arrangements failed.  The "de facto"

The referenced name system failed for many reasons, not the least of which 
was the failure of the general architecture and protocols for which it was 
designed.  As a consequence, there is no meaningful way to extract details 
about that experience and apply them to the current case.

At the least it is difficult to draw operational conclusions from a service 
that never reached a meaningful level of operation.

 >Sure.  We're dealing with private, enhanced services provisioning.
 >Why are they getting singled out for and potentially subjected to
 >this special regulatory regime.  Or as the EU 9 August proposal to

The need for centralized management of the DNS is due to its hierarchical 
nature.  This is a matter of technical basis and isn't subject to political 
adjustment.

No other aspect of the Internet requires centralized administration or 
operation.  For that matter, the DNS is designed to delegate as much admin 
and ops as it can.

 >the WTO suggests, all "Internet access and network service providers"
 >are now going to be subject to regulatory treatment as telecoms?
 >Is this what we're all helping along?

We've yet to be offered the specific reference for the purported 9 Aug 
communication, so there is no way for the rest of us to judge the 
applicability of the reference nor its seriousness in terms impact, if any.

d/

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker                                         Tel: +1 408 246 8253
Brandenburg Consulting                               Fax: +1 408 273 6464
675 Spruce Drive                             <http://www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA                 <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>