RE: [wg-review] Re(2): [cctld-discuss] Comments on review of DNSOby Mr Park

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

I think that you take Dr. Lisse a little too narrowly. What is a DNS
operator? My definition is; anyone that operates a DNS system. This means
every hostmaster on the planet. Since resolver code is part of the DNS
system, this means every person that administers a computer that is
connected to the Internet, even a MAC<g>. On the face of it, though, it does
sound a trifle elitist of him.

If you have a domain name registered to you, you are an operator. The "MHSC
Summary opinion" also made controlling a domain name a qualifier, for GA
membership. Someone who controls, is an administrator, at the least, and can
be considered an operator.  I called it "color of title", like the IDNO
does. Under those terms, he is correct. I don't think that he meant to limit
the DNSO purely to registries (an interpretation that you seem to be
taking).

Dr. Lisse' bed-side manner sometimes misses the mark. But, he's not wrong...
this time.

BTW, I control over 20 name servers, six of them are root servers. I am an
owner-operator-administrator. Dr Lisse set up the NA ccTLD, so he is an
registry operator-administrator.


> From: Robin Miller [mailto:robin@minervan.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 1:17 AM
> 
> YJ Park wrote...
> 
> Together with its brief description on Review WG progress above
> in the middle of holiday season, it is a great pleasure to let GA know
> Review WG slowly approaches to the below issues.
> 
> > * the GA-Chair election method ... [snip]
> > the petition from the GA (physical meeting) to the Board directly
> 
> > * Individual Constituency
> > The eternal question: how to proceed in order to have 
> *real* progress?

> now, yes its DNSO review. But its also meant to address these 
> two issues. Now
> Mr. Lisse has implied only DNS operators really have a voice 
> here. This is what
> has some of us a little bit ticked off. Now what does 
> exclusively catering to
> ccTLD and DNS operators have to do with the above topics? Are 
> they the only
> ones whose opinions matter in an individuals constituency?
> 
> Robin
> 
> Roeland Meyer wrote:
> > 
> > I think that we need clarifacation and re-focusing from the 
> chais here. The
> > name of this WG is WG-Review. The ostensible charter is to 
> review the
> > performance, or lack thereof, of the DNSO, overall.
> > 
> > Am I wrong here?
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html