Hello, folks, To keep the debate relatively focused, I think a FAQ or at least a list of non-topics is in order. Here's my initial cut at a weekly FAQ posting, in text and html. --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify some people 185 Ellerslie Ave., | astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain Willowdale, Ontario | davecb@hobbes.ss.org, canada.sun.com N2M 1Y3. 416-223-8968 | http://java.science.yorku.ca/~davecb
An Unofficial IAHC Faq
This list of collected questions and putative answrs will be posted weekly
to the list, probably on Fridays. It is NOT the official opinion of the
committee or its membership, but I will do my best to make it reflect the
discussion. In other words, I'll try real hard not to lie (:-))
This commenced with the list of technical subjects that I suggested the IAHC
keep and eventually publish. Since I suggested it, looks like I volunteered
to do it... --davecb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions
1. Subjects the ad-hoc committee isn't addressing:
o Registry identifiers
o Domain name prefix search
o Authentication of domain names
o DNS requirements
o Root nameserver issues
o National TLDs
2. What about current TLDs?
3. Will IAHC consider whether or not to have new iTLDs?
4. What about government proceedings?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Subjects the Ad-Hoc Committee Isn't Addressing
Each of the following is an area that this committee shouldn't be
addressing, and the IETF working group that is or arguably should be
addressing it. Working groups may also be found at
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html.
Registry Identifiers (Rick H. Wesson)
... how a registry manages contact, domain, and name server handles? If
so should some one write a proposal on how these identifiers are to be
handled?...
davidk@ISI.EDU writes:
The not existing (yet) IRE (or what it is called now) IETF working
group that would deal with the *IP* registries future has also already
proposed a spin-off working group that would be dealing with database
(format) issues and the like. One of the the identified problems is the
NIC handle and registry identifier. I am currently writing (together
with David Conrad) a proposed charter for a working group that would
deal with these kind of issues. It seems that the data availability
issues for domain registries are very similar to IP address space
registries. I think that it might be a good idea if we join our efforts
;-).
Is this part of the Operational Requirements Area? --davecb
Domain name prefix search (Merton Campbell Crockett)
One of the issues raised on the IETF mailing list was the problem of
DNS being used as a search engine. Several people suggested that the
publishers of Web Browsers include search engines that would query a
registry for the desired domain name.
No known group yet... Possibly related groups in the applications area
are
o Access, Searching and Indexing of Directories (asid)
o Common Indexing Protocol (find) (Applications Area)
o Integrated Directory Services (ids)
o Uniform Resource Names (urn)
and just possibly
o Service Location Protocol (svrloc) (Internet Area)
Authentication of Domain Names (Tony Rutkowski)
ie, DukeU.com.
No known group yet... Possibly in the Security area?
DNS Requirements (Leonid Egoshin)
IMHO, any attempt of solving .COM problem without technology change of
DNS as search engine could be unsuccessfull (it would have problems
with legacy of names etc). Also any attempt to shift search fully
outside DNS will be failed (partially shift to directory service is
today). From this I think would be usefull for IAHC to discuss any ways
of DNS technology change.
The current DNS working groups are:
o DNS IXFR, Notification, and Dynamic Update (dnsind) (Internet
Area)
o Domain Name System Security (dnssec) (Security Area)
Root nameserver issues (Merton Campbell Crockett)
How will a root nameserver with incomplete knowledge "discover" another
root nameserver? A different part of the broad DNS question: working
groups as above.
National TLDs (Tristan Palmer)
...from a UK perspective. Secondly I would like to discuss the problems
raised by monopoly of the name spaces, and to see if my...
No suitable group at least thus far, and in part a question for each
national registry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. What About Current TLDs?
Ronald J. Fitzherbert asks (by implication) if...
the current ones should be part of the new process. Ie., we go back to
ground 0 and re-evaluate the current iTLDs and registry as part of this
process with the possibility of giving the current iTLDs to another
registry, or eliminating some or all of them based upon the selection
criteria that comes out of the IAHC.
No Official Statement has been made.
Dave Crocker notes
The topic has certainly come up. I don't know what is reasonable or
possible with respect to their current agreement.[...] Trying to figure
out the right DIRECTION to move, however, does seem like something we
can do sooner rather than later.>I>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Will IAHC Consider Whether or not to Have New iTLDs?
Vince Wolodkin asks if
the IAHC was going to consider that new iTLD's may not be the answer.
No Official Statement has been made.
Perry E. Metzger notes (pending an official comment) that
We therefore made a principled decision not to assume before the fact
that new iTLDs were the only possible solution. They are a very strong
possibility, but we prefer to come to that conclusion after doing our
work, not before.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. What About Government Proceedings?
Tony Rutkowski (I think!) asks
Given two governmental official public proceedings in the matter - in
both the US and Europe - shouldn't any decisions, much less actions,
await the completion of those proceedings?
No Official Statement has been made.
Robert Shaw notes
If you're speaking about the joint USPTO/NTIA hearings, we are in
constant liaison with USPTO reps to track what they are doing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Collier-Brown / davecb@canada.sun.com / davecb@hobbes.ss.org
Title: An Unofficial IAHC FAQ
This commenced with the list of technical subjects that I suggested the IAHC keep and eventually publish. Since I suggested it, looks like I volunteered to do it... --davecb
Each of the following is an area that this committee shouldn't be addressing, and the IETF working group that is or arguably should be addressing it. Working groups may also be found at http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html.
davidk@ISI.EDU writes:
The not existing (yet) IRE (or what it is called now) IETF working
group that would deal with the *IP* registries future has also already
proposed a spin-off working group that would be dealing with database
(format) issues and the like. One of the the identified problems is
the NIC handle and registry identifier. I am currently writing
(together with David Conrad) a proposed charter for a working group
that would deal with these kind of issues. It seems that the data
availability issues for domain registries are very similar to IP
address space registries. I think that it might be a good idea if we
join our efforts ;-).
Is this part of the Operational Requirements Area? --davecb
No known group yet... Possibly related groups in the applications area are
No known group yet... Possibly in the Security area?
The current DNS working groups are:
No suitable group at least thus far, and in part a question for each national registry.