How about GNUnet e.V. doing that as well? It does seem more reasonable than giving it to a private person.
- Martin On Sat, 2017-02-18 at 16:45 +0100, Christian Grothoff wrote: > I think it would be ideal if we didn't just "have" the domains, but > if > we had someone running an FCFS (or other policy) registration service > for GNS there, and possibly a dns2gns bridge, as you envisioned. So > if > we had volunteers that could envision doing so in the future, I'd say > that's a good reason to retain the domains. So anyone here who has > plans of becoming a public service registrar for the GNU Name System? > > On 02/17/2017 08:12 PM, tg (x) wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I got the gnu.name & gnu.zone domains thinking it would be useful > > for promoting GNS, for instance setting up FCFS registration [1] > > there > > and perhaps also a GNS to DNS zone proxy at <fcfs-name>.gnu.name & > > <zkey>.gnu.zone > > that may be useful in case one wants to put IP addresses in their > > zones > > and want that still reachable from the rest of the DNS world. > > > > I'd transfer these domains to GNUnet e.V. since I already have > > enough domains > > and it is also better to keep them registered to the project. > > > > Does GNUnet e.V. want to have these domains? > > > > [1] https://gnunet.org/gns-fcfs-authority-started > > > > _______________________________________________ > > GNUnet-developers mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers > > > > _______________________________________________ > GNUnet-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
