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

[Jim Reid <]

>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg@localhost writes:

    Daniel> Who is selling DNSSEC courses? 

I was thinking this might have been a way to keep me in very fine,
rare malt whisky. :-) I have an Advanced DNS Admin course that could
be used as the basis of a DNSSEC training course. However, there's not
much point in trying to develop and sell such a course -- far less try
to make a living from that -- when RIPE NCC is offering one "for free"
that would attract most, if not all, potential customers. That's
hardly fair or neutral, eh?

    >> I fear that your plans for DNS monitoring will similarly
    >> distort the market. Firstly, potential customers -- TLDs,
    >> regulators, etc -- will expect to get this type of service for
    >> free instead of paying for it as they really should. Secondly,
    >> it will prevent commercial operators, some of whom could well
    >> be NCC members, from providing this kind of service. Who can
    >> compete with free?

    Daniel> Yes, but is there a market?  And can this be done
    Daniel> independently and neutrally for a fee?  

These questions can't be answered if NCC does this for free and
therefore strangles at birth any attempts by someone else to offer
these services and/or create a market for them.

    Daniel> Again we needed this for k.root-servers.net operations.

Fine. So monitor K and ns.ripe.net and ns.eu.net: the servers directly
under the NCC's responsibility. But stop there. There's a huge leap
going from there to monitoring every TLD and root server on the planet
"for free" and I just don't see the justification for that quite
frankly. Monitor these other servers by all means. Provided the people
running those servers pay at least the full costs of providing that
service to them. This would of course require much more transparency
in identifying the costs and overheads of providing these additional,
non-core services.

    Daniel> The RIPE NCC is another kettle of fish than a commercial
    Daniel> company.  You need stability and neutrality and that has
    Daniel> its price!

Indeed. But where is the neutrality if NCC is raising the barriers to
entry by offering additional, non-core services "for free" that are
cross-subsidised from its core, monopoly services? I've given a couple
of examples where NCC's actions/policies have far from neutral market
consequences. Simply by their existence, these non-core services NCC
offers have eliminated competition. Or prevented commercial players
entering the market. What's worse, those additional services might
have been provided by the NCC membership if they'd been given the
chance. And that extra revenue could have helped them pay for NCC's
recently increased fees. :-)

I would also like to see the NCC's projects (such as DISI) subject to
regular external review to ensure they are seen to be on track and
meeting their objectives, deliverables, timelines and budgets. Perhaps
this already happens and I as a non-member just don't know about that?

    Daniel> What if you lean it until it falls over at the
    Daniel> most inconveient time?

This is less likely to happen if NCC sticks to its core job -- an RIR
-- and makes sure it has enough cash to carry out that role. The
further NCC moves from its absolutely critical RIR responsibility, the
more likely that core function will be at risk. And the more likely
the EU's anti-competition people will come knocking at the door....

    Daniel> Talking about fairness: The RIPE NCC does not have stock
    Daniel> options either. Yes I have a relatively secure job, but
    Daniel> that's because I think the RIPE NCC is important for the
    Daniel> Internet in Europe and I chose for it *in good times* when
    Daniel> there were *a lot* more interesting offers in terms of
    Daniel> remuneration.

Daniel, please don't take my earlier comments personally. This
discussion has nothing to do with our respective career choices or
money. It's about more important things. :-)

FYI, I don't have stock options either. [These die when you get
downsized you know.] I don't even have a job. Let alone a relatively
secure one. And as I look for new things to do in the DNS arena,
there's this 800 pound NCC gorilla in my backyard which is almost
literally eating my lunch. It's giving away "for free" the services I
might want to provide and try to earn a living from. Where's the
fairness you speak of? The only consolation I have is that since I'm
not an NCC member, I'm not paying for that gorilla to eat my lunch.