I have been passed on the following message and would like to comment on it:
Yes - we told them it might not be a good idea in the long term but what can you do....
Not much. It's a bit surprising though that the NIC did accept this registration from people outside DG.
We have been funded by the CEC/BRA to set up an support infrastructure to help researchers in Europe exchange information and to supply support for issues like storage, naming, etc. The infrastructure is based on a large number of fileservers throughout Europe using AFS as main technology. Although in the startup phase aiming to support the nodes covered by the three first Networks Of Excellence: ELSNET, CaberNet and Compulog, the infrastructure is supposed to be the blueprint for an infrastructure also covering the new NOE's formed last year.
In the framework of naming we wanted to enable resolution through the DNS. As there was no top domain available that would cover a general CEC organization, under which the infrastructure could be placed, we requested (with full knowledge and appreciation of DG) a domain name for a top domain ec.org. This domain was to be managed by the Infrastructure Task Force of the proposed infrastructure for a startup-period, after which the management of the top domain would be handed over to an institution selected by DG. The subdomains dedicated to the research infrastructure would still be managed by our own people.
(Instead of calling it "funny", Dave, you could have explained all this as you are aware of most of the details of the infrastructure provision, including the naming part)
Werner, yes - this is true I could have mentioned all the above at the risk of flooding the whole list. However you may have missed the original e-mail requesting guidance on the provision of a domain name for the Europen Parliment. What I mean by "funny" is (and I mentioned it to the NOEs when this suggestion of ec.org was made) that we would have multiple organisations connected in one way or another to the commission or the EC all seeking to register domain names in an uncoordinated way. At the time I suggested consulting the RIPE people for guidance but I think this didn't happen. As other more experienced DNSs have already mentioned there are many good reasons to think twice before registering any old name just because it might sound reasonable. And yes - I'm still not convinced registration under .org was a good choice. Perhaps I should have been more careful in my choice of words - it's not funny - it's a pity that it was not thought about a little more beforehand.
And as far as the nameservers are concerned:
.....
So not to be taken serious.
I do not think that is a remark to be made without any further consultation of the people involved.
At the time of registration of the ec.org name, the machines to run the servers were not yet delivered. The two names were supplied to the NIC as being "temporary", to be replaced as soon as the initial part of the research infrastructure was in place. The first two servers (INESC and Univ. of Twente) are running now, while this week the servers at the Univ. of Newcastle and at LAAS will be added. Our first concern is to have the AFS servers properly running, after that the NIC will be informed about which machines will provide the DNS service.
It might also be a good idea to inform the RIPE NCC so that people in Europe also know what's going on. Dave