<shrug> I just meant to list the sorts of pressures that have moved DNS
issues squarely out of the realm of the technical. I understand that some
entrepreneurs want *un*shared registries--they could make lots of money as
the sole holders of them--while others want a piece of a registry: witness
the number of companies seeking to join the shared registration system for
.com, .net, and .org. And, the White Paper--which I think I've seen you
call a consensus document at times--does reference the idea. I
dunno. Doesn't seem like bias to me to simply include it on the list, but
I suppose he who has the blinders on doesn't readily know what he's
missing. ...JZ
I'd written:
>ICANN's model is certainly a far cry from that--but the basis of the White
>Paper was that Jon's system wasn't working anymore on its own. Jon
>certainly wanted out of the creeping policy stuff, and other pressures--new
>TLDs, trademark interests, and entrepreneurial interests in shared
>registries with millions of dollars at stake--pushed this enough out of the
>"mere" technical realm to require a more formal decisionmaking
>structure.
At 09:54 PM 7/8/99 , Jay Fenello wrote:
>Hi Jonathan,
>
>On another list, you asked me to give you
>the benefit of the doubt when I detected
>bias. Ok, I've detected bias:
>
>"Shared registries" were not promoted by
>the entrepreneurs that I knew, it was a
>business model promoted by the IAHC!
>
>Jay.
Jon Zittrain
Executive Director, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
