[apnic-talk] What was left out? AURSC ... Re: Funny. The White Paper c
> A little gloating huh? >;) Well I don't blame you! I am quite pleased
Yes, true, but I can't help it, not this time.
>with most of the results and stipulations from the White Paper myself, as
Actually I'm very disappointed. It's exactly what I expected. And as I
say that, I'd like to add I was hoping it would show a strict swing away
from the IAHC and a positive swing towards RSC's or at least their
development and migration.
Clearly that hasn't happened. Well the IAHC got stumped, but RSC's can
swing either way. Certainly makes for an interesting 12 months.
AURSC has of cource progressed now to only being a member of the IRSC
http://www.irsc.ah.net or http://www.i.rsc This is better than I'd ever
expected.
>you pointed out in brief here. Nicely done as well Adam. I am sure that
<smile> Thanks. Now go and tell all the Aussie ISPs who thing the world
revolves around them. Actually there really aren't that many, a very small
percentage. The remainder are DNS aware and agree with AURSC and myself,
or haven't a clue what it all means and don't give a damn.
>APNIC and many regional ISP's will have mixed feelings, but that is to be
>expected.
DAvid COnrad posted to the Aussie ISP list a few days ago, when i brought
this up, stating a few things. I think I was far closer to the truth. I
might bring those messages up next week, just as a point of interest.
David did try to more or less say (without saying it) that I was wrong and
way off the mark. I feel I was far closer.
> Though there are some areas that we are still concerned about with respect
>the "Board members seats" they are not all that serious. Most importantly
Yes, I have concerns as to how Geoff Huston - sold to Telstra Body and Soul
- gets titled to the position in the ITAG. It's very concerning to think
that our Monopoly Telco could be named, yet along have the Employee given
the time to be involved. It's unlike Telstra to allow this unless they
have an alterior motive.
DNS would be a fairly big alteria motive, considering I'd recently heard
that Telstra had purchased Melbourne IT or something similar.
>the IANA (Current version), will not have a strangle hold one the DNS system
>but will have an advisory capacity, which is appreciate under the
>circumstances.
Reading the white paper, and by selecting the board members, there is NO
REASON that the New Corpoation can't have a strangle hold when the time is
right, in fact there is nothing stopping the Board Members having total
financial interests in the whole process and the end sale of names.
That concerns me.
But again the white paper doesn't directly address AURSC, it does mention
AlterNIC and eDNS. AlterNIC has it's problems, being EK's current status,
and of course a number of wannabe's trying to take it over. I've seen no
recent information of data flowing from Alternic in the last three months.
THis makes it least a threat.
Then eDNS, well anyone who is anything to do with DNS knows how poor it is
run, how it's falls to peices and is more of a political nightmare
internally than anything else.
I'm STUNNED AURSC didn't get a mention. In fact it almost looks like it
was deliberately left out. I put forward a very detailed and descriptive
submission, with several mentioned about AURSC and it's objectives.
Clearly it wasn't mentioned for the purpose of avoiding people having their
attention drawn to it.
AURSC is the only - to date - stable and constanlty updated Root Server
Network. IN fact it was the basis of the IRSC, which now included members
from France, New Zealand, the USA, and a list of other locations.
It's growth factor is HUGE. http://www.aursc.ah.net
(Anyone interested in participating is welcome to discuss entry with me any
time they like)
Perhaps Christoher Ambler will now further discuss .WEB with AURSC and my
Registry Company.
WE have a good market for AUS names here too. AUS being an Enhanced TLD in
the AURSC Servers. Lost of comsumer interest.
> In addition as you pointed out, many of the things that we worked so hard
>behind the scenes and before the GP even came out were embodied as well.
Yes, true. I think the Green Paper was restictive in it's own right, and
perhaps deliberately.
I'm quite surprised yet again that the United States gets several
mentiones, the EU gets a mention, yet the Australian interests didn't get a
hint. Mind you that's probably because the Australian Government asked for
an extention - of all things. This probably caused serious harm to AURSC
as well. Shame AURSC has NO connection to the AU Government whatsoever,
with exception to the fact it liases regularly with the ACCC. Our consumer
Watchdog.
>Looks like allot of your and my detractors now have egg on their face! >;)
>LOL!
Yes true, but lets not laugh too loud yet. The next 6 months are going to
be hard work.
NSI look like loosing, in effect, the control they are very use to having.
This could open some opportunities later this year when time gets closer.
(Right Chuck? See you in August!)
> Let me also gloat a bit as well! To the DAVE CROCKERS, PATRICK GREENWELLS,
>CRAIG SIMONS, KENT CRISPINS, ect of the DNS debates, HA HA HA, you
>lost, and badly I might add!!!!
I'd not gloat that much - at least not yet.
Jeff, I think it's time IRSC were pushed further forward. IRSC is a clear
showing of the Internet Community - it's Service Provider and Commercial
interest leaders forging forward and making a clear statement that they
will provide TOTAL service to their clients, not impartial services because
they can't accept change and expansion.
Gosh if we looked at Modems the way we look at Enhanced TLDs, we'd probably
still be using 50 baud acustic couplers!
> In an earlier post, I indicated that we will be posting to the NTIA and the
>pertinent E-Mail list an official response in detail on all aspects of the
I don't know if that's worth while. NTIA hasn't asked for further comments
and the WP tends to indicate it's all systems go forward.
>White Paper. We will be making suggestions as to how,who and under what
>method "Board Members" are or should be selected, which was not spelled out
>very well in the WHite Paper,
Um, that's debatable, an Interim Board has already been selected from my
understanding. (That was another issue I raised with David Conrad in that
Aussie list, but was told I was speaking from my rear!)
I'm not sure if at the time I speculated WHO the members would be, but I'm
sure I did discuss this with my wife. Only two surpirses on the list :)
>and a very important area for the future of the DNS and IP address allocation
>systems. But at least Jon Postal or Don Heath will not be getting the top
>seat!
Um, don't bet on it. The WP makes it clear that IANA is to become the new
corporation - aptly known currently as IANA Inc. I feel we'll see a
scramble for the FREE Airline Tickets and World whirlwind tours. You can
mark my words on this. Fon Heath will be vying for a "USER" representative
seat. And will push very hard, like once before, claiming full support from
the internet community.
I don't even like Don Heath - how dare he claim FULL SUPPORT. My wife and
I don't support hinm - one iota.
THE DOMAIN NAME HANDBOOK http://www.domainhandbook.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The advice offered in this email is not considered professional advice,
or it would be accompanied by an invoice. No permission is granted for
republication of comments, without written consent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Business Development, Technology Domain Registration and Network Advisory
Telstra Convey Member AURSC http://www.aursc.ah.net
Adam Todd Personal http://adamtodd.ah.net
at@aus or at at ah dot net http://adam.says.sheesh
Phone +61 2 9729 0565 Network http://www.ah.net
AU Internet News http://www.ah.net/lists/lwgate/INTERNET/
AU Internet User Mail List http://www.ah.net/lists/lwgate/OZ-USER/
INTERNATIONAL ROOT SERVER CONFEDERATION MEMBER http://www.i.rsc
* APNIC-TALK: General APNIC Discussion List *
* To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to apnic-talk-request at apnic dot net *