[ncc-services-wg] [dns-wg] Re: dnsmon / .org

At 11:17 AM +0200 2003/09/10, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:

>                          So doing that may lead to a situation where the
>  RIPE NCC membership ends up paying the whole bill.  I would actually
>  like that because it makes the measurements  even more independent
>  and I would not have to invest time into making agreements with the
>  TLD admins, billing, etc.  pp.
>
>  But is this acceptable to the RIPE NCC memebrship in the long run?
>
>  Comments please!

	I'm not a paying member of RIPE NCC, so my views don't count.

	However, I would like to see this sort of monitoring extended by 
RIPE NCC to all available TLDs, paid for by RIPE NCC.  Indeed, I am 
moving closer to having my own co-lo, and once I do I plan on setting 
up my own monitoring tools for all TLDs, for my own purposes.  I'll 
probably extend that to sharing lame delegation data with Rob Thomas, 
etc....


	If you are concerned about the cost, you could place a copyright 
on the collected data so that re-use for RIPE NCC members does not 
incur an additional charge, and perhaps allow academic re-use by 
non-RIPE NCC members to likewise be without fee, but for-profit 
non-RIPE NCC members would be required to contact you first and 
arrange to pay a fee if they wanted to reuse the data or the results.

	At that point, it basically comes down to how much enforcement of 
the copyright you would want to participate in, and how you could 
make the fee payment scheme at least cover its own administrative 
costs.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles at skynet.be>

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
     -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.

GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)