Re: Shared vs. Exclusive

[Vince Wolodkin <wolodkin@digitalink.com>]

Well, up until I said that, Hank's reasons for supporting exclusive
registries, as he stated them, had much more to do with "so and so will
be mad" and "so and so can't get along with so and so".  I wonder if
Hank has changed his mind, or come up with some better reasons for
supporting exclusive registries.

I am unsure that the IAHC does take these issues seriously(let me
explain).  The most important issue here is the continued success of the
internet and the domain system.  Decisions should be based on what will
be best for this continued success and must be technically and policy
sound.  Decisions MUST not be based on the pre-conceived need to rush
the process.

I FRANKLY DON"T CARE HOW LONG THIS PROCESS TAKES, as long as it is done
right.  Sure, this has been going on a long time, IANA's lack of any
timely action is no reason for this group to be compelled to rush
headlong into bad decisions.

Now, I think I characterize a bad decision a little differently than
some IAHC members.  To me, a bad decision is simply that a bad
decision.  Some IAHC members and members of the community at large seem
to feel that in addition, a bad decision is one that takes more than X
days.  X being some number pulled out of a hat by who???  I don't know.

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO ATTEMPT TO STICK TO THE TIMELINE LAID
OUT IN DRAFT-POSTEL.  While you attempt to drive home that the IAHC is
NOT a rubber-stamp for Postel, you continue to blindly quote roughly the
same timeline.  

The fact that you continue to support such an aggressive timeline for
such an important decision combined with decisions based on personal
dynamics of list participants leaves me reaching for the Mylanta.

Please, please, and please again, DON'T RUSH THE PROCESS!!

Vince Wolodkin


shaw wrote:
> 
> Vince,
> 
> >> It's sad that you make important architectural and policy decisions
> >> based on the petty bickering of a few and not on the reasoned debate of
> >> the many.
> >
> >Good point and I will try to remember it.  Perhaps if more people on the
> >list who agree with that last sentence where to come forward and state
> >their opinions we could move forward.
> >
> 
> Echoing Hank, I can assure you that the IAHC takes these important
> architectural and policy decisions very serious... We are completely
> unfazed by the petty bickering on this list - this is just an (sometimes
> admittedly unpleasant) aspect of the Internet... Rest assured that we are
> paying close attention to those nuggets of 'reasoned debate'.
> 
> Robert
> IAHC member, this time (I'm sure) speaking for all the IAHC