nanog mailing list archives
Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox
From: Eric Brunner-Williams <brunner () nic-naa net>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:36:27 -0700
Peter Beckman wrote:
For which, if you are so inclined, you may credit, or damn, NeuStar. The original bid to the US DoC did not envision the "dotless" or "flat" model displacing the "dotfull" or "hierarchical" model. The US DoC has not yet seen fit to solicit tenders from operators intending to offer a policy model other than that of the current operator. For those of you in the US, who think its worth doing something about, you've about three years to get your congress critter motivated to enable the DoC to find an alternative criteria to the one that allowed the incumbent operator to win the renewal. Some reason(s) why "flat" and all its "first-come, only-served" model is less useful than something else.On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Joe Greco wrote:I see usefulness in having scopes that are local (city/village/etc), state, country, and global. There's no reason that you couldn't startout local, and as you grew, get a state level domain (martyspizza.wi.us),and if you went national (martyspizza.us), etc. In many (most!) cases, businesses do not make significant growth in a rapid fashion.The selfish will abuse the lack of RFC1480 management and go straight tomartyspizza.us, even though they have one store, because it's available atthe time. ...
Current thread:
- RE: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of, (continued)
- RE: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of David Schwartz (Jun 28)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Joe Greco (Jun 28)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Peter Beckman (Jun 29)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Jim Popovitch (Jun 29)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Gadi Evron (Jun 29)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Paul Wall (Jun 30)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. (Jun 30)
- RE: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of David Schwartz (Jun 28)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Peter Beckman (Jun 29)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox Joe Greco (Jun 30)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox Peter Beckman (Jun 30)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox Eric Brunner-Williams (Jun 30)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox Joe Greco (Jun 30)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Jay R. Ashworth (Jun 30)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of Joe Abley (Jun 29)
- DNS and potential energy bmanning (Jun 29)
- Re: DNS and potential energy Rob Pickering (Jun 30)
- Re: DNS and potential energy James Hess (Jun 30)
- Re: DNS and potential energy Tony Finch (Jun 30)
- RE: DNS and potential energy Martin Hannigan (Jun 30)
- Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Joe Greco (Jun 30)