Re: Transfering a domain

["Rick H. Wesson" <wessorh@ar.com>]

On Jan 8,  4:21pm, Kent Crispin wrote:
> Subject: Re: Transfering a domain
> Rick H. Wesson allegedly said:
> >
> > On Jan 8,  2:03pm, davidk@ISI.EDU wrote:
> > >
> > > My light-weight proposal solves this rather elegantly:
> [...]
>
> > David,
> >
> > Under this model you are asking the repository to interface directly
> > with the general public, and that the repository now manage public
> > keys for a wide range of individuals. This extends the scope of the
> > CORE db quite a bit. So now the repository must manage a global
> > public key ring? Do they need a RAID for that ;-)
> >
> > IMHO if CORE ended up manageing a global public key ring, which they must
> > for Davids proposal to work, CORE could become vastly more important in
that
> > function than in manageing a central domain database. Cool idea!
>
> I think David had a much simpler thing in mind -- unfortunately, it
> doesn't work...I am not even sure that a vast global public key ring
> would work, unless you completely give over control of the db records
> to the end user.  Now *that's* an interesting idea.

If you are to allow the end user to manage his/her contact data, how
is that diferent from what we have with NSI. The registries have to have
some function beyone pure allocation of names.

If end-users have to come to the folks that run the CORE db then the
costs to run the CORE db will increase. I believe some were tring to
keep the cost  management/running of the CORE db as small as possable.

-Rick

-- 
Rick H. Wesson