ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [dow2tf] Existence proof of tiered access

  • To: <dow2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <metalitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [dow2tf] Existence proof of tiered access
  • From: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 12:27:03 -0400
  • Sender: owner-dow2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

>>> "Steve Metalitz" <metalitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 8/6/2004 10:32:43 AM >>>
>Milton may misapprehend the nature of the issues that concern 
>me, at least.  I have little doubt that from a technical standpoint, 
>tiered access is implementable.

Good to get that out of the way.

> I am much more concerned about the mechanics of that 
>implementation, the practical costs imposed, and who will bear 

As I argued on the teleconference, it makes no sense to
discuss those issues until and unless we have agreed on
policy objectives. One cannot identify implementations
and cost distributions until one knows what the objective
of the change is. You can't discuss costs unless you know
what you are trying to build. 

If we agree that access *should* be restricted in some way, 
if we understand *why* we are doing it, and we agree on *what*
information should be shielded from public anonymous access and 
*when* it should be released, and *who* has the obligation to
pay for it, then -- and only then -- can we propose and asses 
specific mechanics and costs. This seems obvious to me. Is there
something I am missing?

>[snip] proxy registration services are a
>species of tiered access.  The recommendation of Task Force 
>2 was to learn more about how these work in practice, which 
>would tell us something about how costs are allocated under 
>these services (and also about how much demand there is for 

No great mystery here. You pay $10 a year or so for
the proxy registration in addition to the registration fees.
Could be higher - it's a market price. If you want access to 
the information you should probably pay, too, in my opinion, 
but no, I don't know how that is handled. But it's not that hard 
to ask someone who is actually doing it. 

> But Milton objected to this, according to my notes.  

I objected to wasting more time on "studies" with no determinate
questions to be answered and no guarantee that the results will 
resolve the policy differences we still have. I will continue to do so.

>What I proposed prior to our joint task force call was to
>start our further exploration of tiered access by looking at means of
>identification/authentication, their reliability and costs.  

Steve, are you saying here that if identification, authentication 
and notification are reliable and cheap that you will agree to
implement them? If that is what you are promising, then 
first give me determinate criteria for "reliability" and "
acceptable cost" and I will take you up on it. 

If you are NOT saying that you will accept those results, what
are we to conclude...? 


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>