>Correct me if I'm wrong, but the DNSO
>will be formed before any decisions are
>made wrt the ICANN membership.
This is the main reason I have been keeping silent on this issue. Discussing DNSO membership, *before* ICANN membership is defined, is definitely putting the cart before the horse, IMHO.
IMHO, we should restrict DNSO membership to a single constituency, domain name registrants, assuming that registrar/registry's are also domain name registrants. Leave the users to the ICANN general membership. Incidentally, this also gives the users an implied veto over any SO.
Operationally, this yields a number of beneficial effects;
- Validation/authentication can be via whois records,
- Accurate data entry into whois registrant contact information,
- Every TLD registry needs to run a whois server,
- the whois server capability needs to be audited and a minimum "whois" SLA defined (Note: SLA = Service Level Agreement - IT-speak),
- The registry also becomes the census taker,
- valid registrant audits are taken care of by registry credit checks, normally required for up-front payment,
- The registry becomes a part of the process, thus encouraging good citizenship on their part.
However, the operative fear is that the ICANN will not define a general user class. This fear is reasonable, given ICANN track-record thus far. Trying to force this issue now is pre-mature, on ICANN's part. It shows either gross cluelessness, or a level of disenginuity that is beyond my capability to analyze. The 5FEB99 date is a boon-doggle.
___________________________________________________
Roeland M.J. Meyer -
e-mail:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet
phone:
hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
Personal web
pages:
http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
Company
web-site:
http://www.mhsc.com
___________________________________________________
KISS ... gotta love it!
