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@BXL.DG13.cec.be To: <daniel.karrenberg@ripe.net> cc: <k13@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@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@ripe.net> Sender: dfk@ripe.net To: Andrea.RICCI@bxl.dg13.cec.be Cc: k13@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
Classic answer, Daniel - fire back some questions to them. Dave is right too, they should have a specialist on this. It might be worth pointing out that the position of RIPE wrt European TLD registries is quite different from that of the Internic with all TLD registries. Neither RIPE nor any of its WGs nor the NCC are DNS registries in any sense. This is something the EC and others may be confused about, given the role of the RIPE NCC in IP address registration. At the same time, RIPE should not use your quite reasonable reply to mask its views on some of the questions concerning the proposal from J Postel for new TLDs and registries. The DNS WG has strong views on this, backed by RIPE, and these should be made known. Regards. Mike
"Mike Norris" <mnorris@hea.ie> writes:
Classic answer, Daniel - fire back some questions to them.
Well Mike, these weren't just some questions. They ask for the information I think I need before spending NCC resources on this issue. I need this information to justify doing this to the contributors. As you may recall from the discussion at the last contributors meeting, things like this are considered on the fringe of the NCC's mandate.
Dave is right too, they should have a specialist on this.
More than one. The most dangerous thing is policy makers makingpolicy advised by the clueless or even the clueful with particular interests only. And I beleive that they are trying to do just that - get more opinions in. BTW: Do not assume DGXIII or even Mr. Ricci is not reading this. They may very well be.
It might be worth pointing out that the position of RIPE wrt European TLD registries is quite different from that of the Internic with all TLD registries. Neither RIPE nor any of its WGs nor the NCC are DNS registries in any sense. This is something the EC and others may be confused about, given the role of the RIPE NCC in IP address registration.
That is true. RIPE ha no executive role in this, only and advisory one.
At the same time, RIPE should not use your quite reasonable reply to mask its views on some of the questions concerning the proposal from J Postel for new TLDs and registries. The DNS WG has strong views on this, backed by RIPE, and these should be made known.
that was the point of my original issue. To repeat: 1) Do we have the final wordsmithed version of the position discussed at the lat meeting? If not when will we have it? 2) In the absence of that should I go and tell them what I think the position is? Could the chair(s) do that? Should I wait ? I'd appreciate (personal if you wish) feedback from the group and preferably the chair(s). Daniel
participants (2)
-
Daniel Karrenberg -
Mike Norris