Following up several points in this thread...
I presume the DC conf. Tony was talking about was the "Forum on Internet
Domain Names" announced at http://www.itaa.org/dnsconf.htm . Are there
links to reports or transcripts handy?
If there is about to be another go 'round on the carrousel, it would be
good to remind ourselves how that meeting went. I recognize that there's
no consensus here that establishing a code of conduct might be a brass
ring worth grabbing, it's not clear that this was one of the expressed
purposed of the conference.
As far as AOL's position in the industry, I agree that it's critical.
Consequently, it's intriguing that Steve Case is running for a seat on
the ISOC BOT.
For John, see http://www.nw.com/zone/WWW/secondnames.html
I haven't thought much further about the how to model the substance or
the constituency of such a code of conduct, other than to think it would
be focused around parties providing services to the "public" Internet.
This reflects my own attempt to advocate and defend the concept of a
stable, coherent, and truly global DNS.
For Alex...
I'm not thinking about a gatekeeping fee, but a code of conduct. Why
would any fee be necessary? Perhaps (thinking out loud) to maintain a
publicly available list of active signers?? That can't cost much. And if
I'm providing name service only for myself, other consumers won't need
to know whether I'm compliant, but my endorsement of the code might be
heard as a voice supporting the legitimacy of the code, and of the
legacy root, etc..
For Eberhard...
Calling the code a "best current practice" might fit well with the
formal naming traditions of the Internet. On the other hand, this code
could also be embedded in an instrument associated with the DNSO or
ICANN.
Craig
