October 1996 - dns-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: iTLDs
by shaw 11 Oct '96

11 Oct '96

A few items: See NSI Fuels Speculation to Go Public at: http://www.idg.com/idg/news/itnews/October/100796/07.htm Also, I've been doing some statistical analysis on NSI registration growth rates. Averaged over the last twelve months, there is approximately a 15% growth rate per month in registrations done by NSI (they've just passed 600,000 total registrations mark). If this growth continues unabated, then by the end of September 1997, there will be approximately 3.1 million registrations generating a maximum annual revenue of US$ 158 million dollars. Furthermore, by the end of the NSF cooperative agreement with NSI (September 1998) there will be approximately 17 million NSI domain name registrations which gives a projected annual revenue of US$ 841 million dollars. Bob

1 0

Re: Position on ITLDs
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 10 Oct '96

10 Oct '96

= > Dave Morton <Dave.Morton(a)ecrc.de> writes: = > = > Ok - fine. Perhaps you need to have a new RIPE work item called = > "Reeducating the Commission" :-). It would after all be part of the = > lobbying/training function discussed already by the contributors. = =If you mean a "RIPE NCC" work item I was under the impression that this =was exactly what the contributors meeting told me to be very careful =with. There was certainly no consensus that the NCC should be doing =this and there was consensus that if RIPE wanted to do lobbying and =industry representation per se it should not be done by the NCC but =seperately in order not to interfere with the NCC's neutrality. =Hence I have removed activity N.4 in all its generality from the activity =plan. May I try to get us down to reality... I still perceive this request as a chance, and I appreciate Bob Shaws contribution! (Although I'd like to add that the issue of educating the other side about benefits and values should be seen bidirectionally. But that would get us into EU business and politics...) The party/ies which might try these days to catch up and to obtain information cannot be expected to have all the details about RIPE at large, the RIPE-NCC in particular and it's funding structure. Otherwise we wouldn't discuss this issue. What I took home from the CC meeting (in my admittedly bad memory :-), was that the NCC is not supposed to do *industry representation* and *lobbying*. Mostly because there might not be implicit consensus about the aims, methods and there might be interference with other activities towards that goal. Please correct me if I'm wrong. =On the other hand the contributors gave the NCC a mandate to speak to =issues directly concerning our activities. Exactly. And please bear in mind that this issue affects the whole community. The impact is not confined to the ISPs and contributing organisations. I think the NCC should keep that in mind. Otherwise it might be perceived as doing exactly what it wants to avoid - lobbying (for the ISPs). =Domain names are =somewhat at the fringes there. This is *unfortunately* true. This was also the reason why I timidly suggested to think about the mandate in that area and -if necessary- the funding aspect involved. We certainly don't have a 1:1 match of ISPs and TLD administrations? I don't see any reason why we shouldn't think about having the TLD admins in the CC? BTW, shouldn't we at least try to get the CC involved by cc'ing them and asking about their position? =Now I certainly sound less pragmatic than at other times. And it worries =me my self to some extent. Where is "go for it not matter what" Daniel? ;-) =But these issues are certainly very political and not important enough =to rush into action. Daniel, I think there is a (growing) need to do DNS coordination in Europe. Much like we evolved the Registry business. Having uniform rules in place really helps *a lot*. I get goose bumps if I try to figure out how it would feel to run the IP-address business in the same way as we run DNS these days. Our customers and counterparts are certainly working and coordinating themself across borders. The truly national approach and splendid isolation might be flawed in the end. If the RIPE NCC feels or becomes blocked in supporting it, it's probably going to happen elsewhere. I'd prefer to have it done within the framework of RIPE. You might want to copy the reasons for that from the CERT-CC discussion. BTW, I fully support the controlled approach and the attempt to find out what this is all about and what the rules are. But I think we shouldn't miss that or similar opportunities - if they really *are* opportunities. Wilfried. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at Computer Center - ACOnet : Vienna University : Tel: +43 1 4065822 355 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4065822 170 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : NIC: WW144 --------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Position on ITLDs
by Niall O'Reilly 10 Oct '96

10 Oct '96

On 10 Oct 96 at 11:06, Mike Norris wrote: >I had to leave before the end of the DNS WG mtg, but maybe >Niall (scribe and almost co-chair) has the agreed text. > >Mike But it wasn't finalised in the meeting, or even in the special sub-committee meeting. Ruediger did a lot of work between this and the closing plenary, and there was even then to be further discussion on the list. My notes of Liman's report to the plenary from the dns-wg session show an action on Ruediger to send his draft to the list for discussion. Niall

1 0

iTLDs
by shaw 10 Oct '96

10 Oct '96

Daniel, As public policy officials in DG XIII who have liaison responsibilities with the US State Department who are discussing problems with DNS policy issues (e.g., see http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/acicip.html and http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/intellec.html), they have a interest in this topic to formulate a cohesive European position. DNS issues are impacting public interests especially within an intellectual property context. For one example of domain name hijacking, see the attached message. IMHO, I think it might be in RIPE's interest to cooperate a little more with them since the issues are clearly impacting outside a normal "Net" technical context. Bob

3 5

Re: Position on ITLDs
by Dave Morton 10 Oct '96

10 Oct '96

> > Dave Morton <Dave.Morton(a)ecrc.de> writes: > > Daniel - no - not *you* personally but the NCC.....that was also > > Wilfried's suggestion as I understood it. > >The NCC cannot *consult* for them because there would be a clear conflict >of interest were we to accept work and money from the comission. Hmm, I see now what you mean. Well at least point them to someone who is competent instead of having them end up with some twit of a Brussels consultant who as Wilfried pointed out will probably produce the predictable results. >Of course we can (and will) provide them with information once we know >enough about the purpose of this to convince me that I can defend this >towards the contributors. Ok - fine. Perhaps you need to have a new RIPE work item called "Reeducating the Commission" :-). It would after all be part of the lobbying/training function discussed already by the contributors. >Are we communicating? Yep. Cheers, Dave >DAniel

2 1

Re: Position on ITLDs
by Dave Morton 10 Oct '96

10 Oct '96

> > Dave Morton <Dave.Morton(a)ecrc.de> writes: > > >>Good answer to the Commission Daniel - I'd also suggest that if they > > >>want all that information they should hire a consultant instead of > > >>perstering you guys. > > > > > > Well, I'd propose the RIPE-NCC as the consultant ! > > > > Wilfried - that was my hint, hint to DFK :-) > >Dave, > >I hope you weren't serious. >In my present position as NCC manager I cannot consult for them even >if I wanted to. Daniel - no - not *you* personally but the NCC.....that was also Wilfried's suggestion as I understood it. Dave >Daniel >

3 2

Re: Position on ITLDs
by Dave Morton 10 Oct '96

10 Oct '96

>>Good answer to the Commission Daniel - I'd also suggest that if they >>want all that information they should hire a consultant instead of >>perstering you guys. > > Well, I'd propose the RIPE-NCC as the consultant ! Wilfried - that was my hint, hint to DFK :-) > I perceive this request as a nuisance (to some degree) and as a chance at > the same time to shortcut their hiring of a "typical" consultant ;-) > Many of us know what the results might be... Too true unfortunately, thus I support your suggestion. > Interestingly enough they seem to believe that DNS is only available in FR, > DE, and UK. At least for the other EU member countries they could have > known better :-) Ve have vays of making them learn - start by asking them to attend RIPE meetings perhaps. Dave > Wilfried.

2 1

Position on ITLDs
by Daniel Karrenberg 10 Oct '96

10 Oct '96

How is the position on ITLDs coming along? We are receiving questions like the one included FYI below. I have also included our first answer for your enjoyment. Does the group have a problem if we use the minutes rather than the fully drafted statement to answer queries like this? Daniel ------- Forwarded Message Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 16:16:08 +0200 From: Andrea.RICCI(a)BXL.DG13.cec.be To: <daniel.karrenberg(a)ripe.net> cc: <k13(a)nikhef.nl> Subject: DNS Dear Mr. Karrenberg, I'm Andrea Ricci from the Commission DG XIII Int. aspects of Information Socie ty in Brussels. I'm working on the DNS issue with reference to the Jonathan Pos tel proposal. I'm writing an internal note that should fit into the foreseen gr een paper on numbering. Annie Renard suggested me your name: I have a number of issues to discuss w/ you. You'll find below all the questions I sent today to the ncc(a)ripe.net address af ter a phone conversation. I'd like to have an idea of the mismanagement and the tension created by the .c om vs. .fr or .nl domain names. Domain name hijacking...frauds, disputes. I wou ld be also interested in having the most recent numbers on the .com domains/hos ts (and eventually the number of European companies that have a .com domain). Y our views on the question would be welcome w/ specific reference to the issues you would like to have discussed at European level . For example: is it bad tha t so many Europeans have a .com domain ? Who should be in charge of this manage ment? I'm working on this issue w/ short deadlines. I would be then grateful if you or your collegues could help me as soon as you can. Best regards Andrea Ricci ******************************************************************************* ************************************ are you aware of Mr. Postel proposals on DNS management (the reform would imply new top domains and a structure of multiple registers worldwide, each of them paying 2% to ISOC.. etc.) ? did RIPE discuss this issue in the recent meetings? in which way this change affects the present regime? have you issued documents in this respect? do you know what the asian Nic think of it? Are you aware of DNS based legal conflicts (Intellectual property rights/tradem ark issues) in Europe? Do parties refer to you when a conflict arise? Do you settle the dispute ? DO you have an equivalent to the NSI step96 dispute settlement document? How many delocalized centres for domain name management exist in Europe (in F, NL, UK and more) ? Who has decided the European management rules (.co.uk or .gouv.fr for example) ? Do the other European countries have DNS structures ? What is the sharing of responsibilities between RIPE and the other registers? If I want to register I domain, am I perfectly free to chose a .com or a .nl ? Do you think that there is a real advantage to file a .com instead of a ISO3166 ? Is it formally classified as international resources the .com top domain (i.e. does the customer know that he is buying a global domain?) Is there any form of check that a org is non profit and a .com is for profit? W ho checks? Could I buy a .com from belgium (I presume yes) but if I buy it from a service providers (like EUNet) did they buy the resource in advance in the US from NSI ? Is there a way to know how many .com come from European companies? MIDS say yes but they refuse to tell how they can produce those data...any clue? Have you too heard that NSI has developed a 30 mil. $ budget? Is RIPE earning resources for their activity? Thanks for your help. I understand that this requires time to answer. I'll appr eciate any form of support You can write or call me.Regards Andrea RIcci phone 32 2 29 58215 fax 32 2 29 68970 ------- End of Forwarded Message ------- Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 09:01:02 +0200 From: Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg(a)ripe.net> Sender: dfk(a)ripe.net To: Andrea.RICCI(a)bxl.dg13.cec.be Cc: k13(a)nikhef.nl Subject: Re: DNS In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 08 Oct 1996 16:16:08 +0200. <WIN2359-961008141608-40B0*/G=Andrea/S=RICCI/OU=BXL/O=DG13/PRMD=CE C/ADMD=RTT/C=BE/@MHS> ------- Dear Mr Ricci, thank you for your message of yesterday. Due to previous experiences with similar matters I would like to know a few things myself before spending time to answer your questions: 1) What exactly are you going to do with this information? - what is the note about that tou are writing? - who has requested it? - what is the 'green paper' about? - who has requested it? - who is expected to do what with the results? - what are the timeframes for the above? 2) How will we receive credit for supplying information? 3) How will the positions of RIPE be identified as such and how will RIPE have the opportunity to correct any misrepresentation? 4) Will we receive copies of any documents produced using our information and/or positions promptly upon completion/publication? 5) How in general terms would you describe the benefit European ISPs would receive from the RIPE NCC spending time on this matter? Please understand that while I am quite willing to help you, I cannot do so until I have received satisfactory answers to the questions above. Let me add that the answers to most of your questions can be researched from public sources, most easily using the Internet itself. I suggest http://www.ripe.net/ as a good starting point. Also the various search engines available are very useful. Kind regards D. Karrenberg RIPE NCC

2 2

Re: Position on ITLDs
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 09 Oct '96

09 Oct '96

>Good answer to the Commission Daniel - I'd also suggest that if they >want all that information they should hire a consultant instead of >perstering you guys. Well, I'd propose the RIPE-NCC as the consultant ! I perceive this request as a nuisance (to some degree) and as a chance at the same time to shortcut their hiring of a "typical" consultant ;-) Many of us know what the results might be... Interestingly enough they seem to believe that DNS is only available in FR, DE, and UK. At least for the other EU member countries they could have known better :-) Wilfried. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at Computer Center - ACOnet : Vienna University : Tel: +43 1 4065822 355 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4065822 170 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : NIC: WW144 --------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Position on ITLDs
by Dave Morton 09 Oct '96

09 Oct '96

>How is the position on ITLDs coming along? >We are receiving questions like the one included FYI below. >I have also included our first answer for your enjoyment. >Does the group have a problem if we use the minutes rather than >the fully drafted statement to answer queries like this? Good answer to the Commission Daniel - I'd also suggest that if they want all that information they should hire a consultant instead of perstering you guys. Dave > >Daniel > >------- Forwarded Message > >Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 16:16:08 +0200 >From: Andrea.RICCI(a)BXL.DG13.cec.be >To: <daniel.karrenberg(a)ripe.net> >cc: <k13(a)nikhef.nl> >Subject: DNS > >Dear Mr. Karrenberg, > I'm Andrea Ricci from the Commission DG XIII Int. aspects of Information Socie >ty in Brussels. I'm working on the DNS issue with reference to the Jonathan Pos >tel proposal. I'm writing an internal note that should fit into the foreseen gr >een paper on numbering. Annie Renard suggested me your name: I have a number of > issues to discuss w/ you. > >You'll find below all the questions I sent today to the ncc(a)ripe.net address af >ter a phone conversation. >I'd like to have an idea of the mismanagement and the tension created by the .c >om vs. .fr or .nl domain names. Domain name hijacking...frauds, disputes. I wou >ld be also interested in having the most recent numbers on the .com domains/hos >ts (and eventually the number of European companies that have a .com domain). Y >our views on the question would be welcome w/ specific reference to the issues >you would like to have discussed at European level . For example: is it bad tha >t so many Europeans have a .com domain ? Who should be in charge of this manage >ment? I'm working on this issue w/ short deadlines. I would be then grateful if > you or your collegues could help me as soon as you can. >Best regards >Andrea Ricci > >******************************************************************************* >************************************ >are you aware of Mr. Postel proposals on DNS management (the reform would imply > new top domains and a structure of multiple registers worldwide, each of them >paying 2% to ISOC.. etc.) ? > >did RIPE discuss this issue in the recent meetings? >in which way this change affects the present regime? >have you issued documents in this respect? >do you know what the asian Nic think of it? > >Are you aware of DNS based legal conflicts (Intellectual property rights/tradem >ark issues) in Europe? >Do parties refer to you when a conflict arise? >Do you settle the dispute ? DO you have an equivalent to the NSI step96 dispute > settlement document? > >How many delocalized centres for domain name management exist in Europe (in F, >NL, UK and more) ? >Who has decided the European management rules (.co.uk or .gouv.fr for example) >? >Do the other European countries have DNS structures ? >What is the sharing of responsibilities between RIPE and the other registers? > >If I want to register I domain, am I perfectly free to chose a .com or a .nl ? >Do you think that there is a real advantage to file a .com instead of a ISO3166 > ? >Is it formally classified as international resources the .com top domain (i.e. >does the customer know that he is buying a global domain?) >Is there any form of check that a org is non profit and a .com is for profit? W >ho checks? >Could I buy a .com from belgium (I presume yes) but if I buy it from a service >providers (like EUNet) did they buy the resource in advance in the US from NSI >? > >Is there a way to know how many .com come from European companies? MIDS say yes > but they refuse to tell how they can produce those data...any clue? > >Have you too heard that NSI has developed a 30 mil. $ budget? >Is RIPE earning resources for their activity? > >Thanks for your help. I understand that this requires time to answer. I'll appr >eciate any form of support >You can write or call me.Regards >Andrea RIcci > > > >phone 32 2 29 58215 >fax 32 2 29 68970 > > >------- End of Forwarded Message > >------- >Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 09:01:02 +0200 >From: Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg(a)ripe.net> >Sender: dfk(a)ripe.net > >To: Andrea.RICCI(a)bxl.dg13.cec.be >Cc: k13(a)nikhef.nl > >Subject: Re: DNS >In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 08 Oct 1996 16:16:08 +0200. > <WIN2359-961008141608-40B0*/G=Andrea/S=RICCI/OU=BXL/O=DG13/PRMD=CE > C/ADMD=RTT/C=BE/@MHS> >------- > > >Dear Mr Ricci, > >thank you for your message of yesterday. Due to previous experiences >with similar matters I would like to know a few things myself before >spending time to answer your questions: > >1) What exactly are you going to do with this information? > > - what is the note about that tou are writing? > - who has requested it? > - what is the 'green paper' about? > - who has requested it? > - who is expected to do what with the results? > - what are the timeframes for the above? > >2) How will we receive credit for supplying information? > >3) How will the positions of RIPE be identified as such and how will >RIPE have the opportunity to correct any misrepresentation? > >4) Will we receive copies of any documents produced using our >information and/or positions promptly upon completion/publication? > >5) How in general terms would you describe the benefit European ISPs >would receive from the RIPE NCC spending time on this matter? > >Please understand that while I am quite willing to help you, I cannot do >so until I have received satisfactory answers to the questions above. > >Let me add that the answers to most of your questions can be researched >from public sources, most easily using the Internet itself. I suggest >http://www.ripe.net/ as a good starting point. Also the various search >engines available are very useful. > >Kind regards > >D. Karrenberg >RIPE NCC >

2 1