The fact that you think I'm commenting about you at all is illuminating :)
On 10/20/14 9:52 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
i won't comment on your experience, having no direct knowledge. why you
comment on mine is uninteresting.
-e
On 10/20/14 9:03 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 10/20/14 7:47 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
having written the technical portion of winning proposal to ntia for the
.us zone, i differ.
The plan I outlined was discussed about 2 years after Neustar took
over management, and TMK was never actually discussed with Neustar.
as i recall, having done the research, in the year prior to the ntia's
tender some six people held some 40% of the major metro area subordinate
namespaces. to my chagrin, relieved by a notice of termination days
before my stock in the company vested, the winner adopted a
"orange-black" model, deprecating the namespace's existing hierarchical
registration model for a flat registration model.
Yes, but the locality-based name space still exists. I used to hold
some names under it, but gave them up when I moved out of state.
Meanwhile, several states actively use their name space. But ...
the registration process model for .us is dissimilar to the registration
process models of .edu, .mil and .gov, as are the contractors to the
government.
... none of this is relevant to the proposal at hand. Neustar manages
the domain on behalf of the USG. There is nothing preventing them from
changing the way it is used, and the 10 year period I proposed takes
runout of existing contracts into account (since EDU, GOV, and MIL
would need continued operation during that period anyway).
Doug
