Re: Shared data base access by registries

["David R. Conrad" <davidc@apnic.net>]

Dave,

>David's response shows a 6-step process that looks reasonable -- because it
>is.  But note that it refers to a formatted message.  What's the format?
>What is the sequence of messages between requestor and responder?  All of
>this, of course, is a protocol.  Now, I LIKE trivial protocols, but the
>fact is that we don't have one in place TODAY to do this job.  The general
>indication is that the DNS dynamic update/registration mechanism will
>suffice, but it's not ready for prime time, yet.

I believe you missed my point.  The simplistic model I presented was a
strawman argument that was pointing out it is essentially trivial to
define those protocols as they are merely implementation details.  The
point I was trying to make was that the technical complexities of
coming up with the necessary protocols for establishing a neutral
third party exclusion service pale to insignificance compared to the
complexities involved in managing the social/political/economic
ramifications of the allocation of monopolistic domains.  The
requirement of sharing of TLDs avoids many of the problems (how to
deal with the AlterNIC squatters and the InterNIC monopoly status for
example), while solving the (assumed) requirement of opening up new
domains.

>	Now there IS a follow-on question, if we cannot find an adequate
>set of standards in place now (and I believe we cannot, although they are
>coming down the pike and will probably be sufficiently mature in 1-2
>years).  

I would be interested in hearing where you see the complexities lying
that would take 1-2 years to resolve.  

Also, I would note that Internet Death is NOT predicted based on
whether or not new top level domains are allocated.  I'm sure the
Internet will continue to limp along should it be necessary.

>That question is:  can we encourage COOPERATIVE sharing?

Realistically, I do not believe so, but perhaps I'm overly cynical.
Given monopolistic domains, you will have a "gold rush" (which has
already started) on the TLD space where people attempt to stake a
claim on what they view as the most profitable TLDs.  Following the
initial gold rush, you will likely see a secondary rush of
organizations purchasing the more profitable domains (or the companies
that operate them).  In both cases, there is absolutely no incentive
to share the domain, and significant incentive to charge fees up to
the point where organizations registering in those domains take the
hit of moving to other domains.

I suppose one solution would be to allow monopolistic domains, but 
only if those domains are random characters (e.g., .N3G).

Regards,
-drc