Re: [ga] A Windfall for VeriSign?

["TLDA Member (David Scott)" <tlda@xxxxxxxxxx>]

What are the thoughts of centralized decentralized populating repository.
A collection of TLD owners interfacing a spread out organization that 
which in turns
update all root/glues to one set structure.

No one company would run the DNS but the collection of TLD owners, updating
a system that then in turns spreads the list out to other TLD owners (or 
root systems).
Where ICANN is the equal to say OPENRSC which is equal to NameSpace 
which is....
you get the idea.

Of course the windfall (the money pit) would be that which the TLD owners
supply by donating one server for the cause. NO overhead, and the TLD owners
are already generating revenue from the selling of the SLD's

Verisign can then choose to stay with ICANN, or expand, or not, but it 
would open the doors
for other Authentication Facilities to utilize the global visualization 
of all TLD's.
First, we must get the Name-Structure verified, as to what is real and 
what is not real. (resolving)
Ross Rader wrote:
> Michael D. Palage wrote:
>
> > Now while on the subject of the DNS being an public resource, I find it
> > amazing that some participants within the ICANN process will wave this
> > public resource flag when a registry tries to exploit a business
> > opportunity, but when it comes to some of the freedoms that some 
> > registrars
> > take with non-renewed or expiring names the public resource analogy 
> > does not
> > apply.
> >
> > Unfortunately, most people just fail to publicly acknowledges that the
> > public resource issue only applies when it deals with someone else 
> > making a
> > windfall. However, when it interferes with one's own windfall then 
> > public
> > resource principles need not apply. Just to be clear these comments 
> > are not
> > directed at TUCOWS, both other participants within the ICANN family. 
> > I only
> > raise them within the context of Ross's initial public policy comments.
> I'll leave the rest for others to comment on, but I will flatly state 
> that the DNS and the registration is a public resource and it needs to 
> be managed as such. This isn't an analogy, its a statement of fact. 
> One which seems to get ignored by many of the participants in this 
> process, including ICANN itself.
> With regards to your specific examples, don't be too amazed. I will 
> continue to advocate that the *entire* resource be managed as a public 
> resource and that we are simply stewards of that resource, regardless 
> of who might stand to profit from any specific opportunities arising 
> from its operation or use.
> I have no envy of Verisign's opportunities, nor of any other party. A 
> rising tide floats all boats. Unfortunately, I don't think we're faced 
> with a rising tide. Rather, far too many are intent on sucking the 
> ocean dry. So long as we're faced with ICANN's weak and uneven 
> regulatory policy and institutional bias, I expect this trend will 
> continue.
--
David Scott             ucann2.org
UCANN2 - see the world's network

        Mobile  ::  +1-678-343-2505
	Office	::  +1-770-267-4361