Re: Some ideas on the future direction of the RIPE TLD-WG

["Kurt Jaeger" <]

Hi!

> >> It may indeed be that only registries (only registries are 
> >> members of CENTR) need to be involved in TLD issues.  

> >> Is there another view ?

> > Basically, if they come to common standards, then there's no
> > need to intervene 8-)

> Hope you are aware that the registrars under COM/NET /ORG
> are allowed to have different policies as well.

I'm not only talking policies. Having a common standard on that
level would be nice, but it's not the only issue. The technical/workflow
part of the delegation process might be subject to "some" standardisation.

Every registry has its own collection of templates, fields
that *must* be filled, rules about SOA records/whatever.

Modify-Requests, registering nameservers, deleting domains,
all this is different for each country.

> I'm not against harmonization but you may also be aware the
> most commonly used policy, the one from NSI, is considered
> a debacle, at least with respect to marks. Would it help
> if anybody would adopt something that is considered a flop ?

I not only find the policy of NSI sub-optimal, but also its
whois response format (among other issues).

> > I'm not sure whether this deviation from common ground is obvious
> > to the TLDs themselves, as they normally only deal with their
> > own TLD 8-)

> We know quite well what's happening outside our territory, don't
> be afraid ;-).

Well, then ask yourself: how much different is your workflow, e.g.
from the one from .at 8-) ?

-- 
MfG/Best regards, Kurt Jaeger                                  21 years to go !
LF.net GmbH        pi@localhost            Oberon.net GmbH   pi@localhost
Vor dem Lauch 23   fon +49 711 90074-23 Friedrich-Ebert-Str.1
D-70567 Stuttgart  fax +49 711 7289041  40210 Duesseldorf fon +49 211 179253-11
For Redmond: "nuke the site from orbit -- it's the only way to be sure."