DNS Top Level Domain Questionnaire
Hello again folks, Response to the questionnaire has, so far, been a bit disappointing. I have received only eight filled in questionnaires. To anyone who is delaying their response I would say, please return your filled in questionnaire as soon as possible so that the information can be quickly collated and prepared for publication. Despite some people's reservations to the usefulness of such a source of information, I consider it would be extremely useful as an initial reference. I take this position based on personal experience of trying to register domains in other countries and also of trying to help organise a useable 'NIC' system for the UK without any information or guidance from other countries' NICs. To those of you from whom I have received replies, thankyou again for spending the time. I hope to have something for publication in the next few weeks (providing I get some more replies quickly) and I will publish the URL to this group once the page is available. I look forward to your responses in the near future. Regards, Guy Davies tel: 01223 250122 ---------- fax: 01223 250121 Network Support Engineer email: guyd@pipex.net Unipalm PIPEX url: http://www.pipex.net 216 Cambridge Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 4WA
Dear Guy,
Hello again folks,
Response to the questionnaire has, so far, been a bit disappointing. I have received only eight filled in questionnaires.
You're right, but be patient. Despite I've promoted this initiative I've been too busy to be able to give a thoughtful answer.
To anyone who is delaying their response I would say, please return your filled in questionnaire as soon as possible so that the information can be quickly collated and prepared for publication. Despite some people's reservations to the usefulness of such a source of information, I consider it would be extremely useful as an initial reference. I take this position based on personal experience of trying to register domains in other countries and also of trying to help organise a useable 'NIC' system for the UK without any information or guidance from other countries' NICs.
To those of you from whom I have received replies, thankyou again for spending the time. I hope to have something for publication in the next few weeks (providing I get some more replies quickly) and I will publish the URL to this group once the page is available.
As a conseguence of some reactions to the questionnaire I suggest to recirculate it with a clear statement that the results will be made available to the TLD administrators but will not be published. During the WG meeting it wasn't clearly decided to make this information accessible to everyone and, since there is somebody who does not like that, we have to be prudent. I suggest to ask RIPE-NCC to create a private repository to be used by an entity we can call "European TLD forum".
I look forward to your responses in the near future.
Regards,
Guy Davies tel: 01223 250122 ---------- fax: 01223 250121 Network Support Engineer email: guyd@pipex.net Unipalm PIPEX url: http://www.pipex.net 216 Cambridge Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 4WA
-- ---------- ---------- Antonio_Blasco Bonito E-Mail: bonito@nis.garr.it GARR - Network Information Service c=it;a=garr;p=garr;o=nis;s=bonito c/o CNUCE - Istituto del CNR Tel: +39 50 593246 Via S. Maria, 36 Fax: +39 50 904052 I-56126 PISA Telex: 500371 CNUCE I Italy Url: http://www.nis.garr.it/nis/staff/bonito.html ---------- ----------
Antonio_Blasco Bonito <bonito@nis.garr.it> writes:
I suggest to ask RIPE-NCC to create a private repository to be used by an entity we can call "European TLD forum".
If the information should be only available to respondants, then distributing it to them directly by e-mail is more practical. Guy can just keep a list of people. If the information is going to be a matter of RIPE working group discussion it has to be public, i.e. seen on the mailing list and archived. Not necessarily published in a widely and easily accessible way. If the goal is to create another longer standing club and the NCC is asked to support it, I would like to consider this carefully and consult with RIPE and the NCC contributors. Daniel
Antonio_Blasco Bonito <bonito@nis.garr.it> writes:
I suggest to ask RIPE-NCC to create a private repository to be used by an entity we can call "European TLD forum".
If the information should be only available to respondants, then distributing it to them directly by e-mail is more practical. Guy can just keep a list of people.
If the information is going to be a matter of RIPE working group discussion it has to be public, i.e. seen on the mailing list and archived. Not necessarily published in a widely and easily accessible way.
If the goal is to create another longer standing club and the NCC is asked to support it, I would like to consider this carefully and consult with RIPE and the NCC contributors.
I see this matter similar to the EOF. RIPE is the natural reference. If the RIPE-NCC needs the approval of the NCC contributors to host a ETLDF repository, that could be asked. But I would leave this issue to be discussed on the list and at the next RIPE meeting.
Daniel
Blasco ---------- ---------- Antonio_Blasco Bonito E-Mail: bonito@nis.garr.it GARR - Network Information Service c=it;a=garr;p=garr;o=nis;s=bonito c/o CNUCE - Istituto del CNR Tel: +39 50 593246 Via S. Maria, 36 Fax: +39 50 904052 I-56126 PISA Telex: 500371 CNUCE I Italy Url: http://www.nis.garr.it/nis/staff/bonito.html ---------- ----------
Antonio_Blasco Bonito <bonito@nis.garr.it> writes:
I see this matter similar to the EOF. RIPE is the natural reference. If the RIPE-NCC needs the approval of the NCC contributors to host a ETLDF repository, that could be asked. But I would leave this issue to be discussed on the list and at the next RIPE meeting.
It is not clear to me what the difference is between "ETLDF" and the DNS-WG is. Further the request was for a closed repository. These are both different from EOF. EOF is a normal RIPE working group governed by the RIPE Terms of Reference and any of their material stored at the NCC is publicly available. In other words: If the RIPE-DNS WG asks for an open repository there is no problem and we will do it immediately. If a closed subgroup asks for a closed repository this needs consultation with the RIPE chair, the WG chair and possibly the contributors. Please understand that I take this slightly more formally than usual because it is a matter of principle that all activities of RIPE and RIPE working groups are open. Daniel
Antonio_Blasco Bonito <bonito@nis.garr.it> writes:
I see this matter similar to the EOF. RIPE is the natural reference. If the RIPE-NCC needs the approval of the NCC contributors to host a ETLDF repository, that could be asked. But I would leave this issue to be discussed on the list and at the next RIPE meeting.
It is not clear to me what the difference is between "ETLDF" and the DNS-WG is. Further the request was for a closed repository. These are both different from EOF. EOF is a normal RIPE working group governed by the RIPE Terms of Reference and any of their material stored at the NCC is publicly available.
In other words: If the RIPE-DNS WG asks for an open repository there is no problem and we will do it immediately. If a closed subgroup asks for a closed repository this needs consultation with the RIPE chair, the WG chair and possibly the contributors.
Please understand that I take this slightly more formally than usual because it is a matter of principle that all activities of RIPE and RIPE working groups are open.
Daniel
I fully understand your position. It is clear that the issue needs further discussion in the RIPE-DNS WG and in a closed group if such one is formed, which is not yet the case. Blasco
Hello,
From: Guy Davies <guyd@pipex.net>
Hello again folks,
Response to the questionnaire has, so far, been a bit disappointing. I have received only eight filled in questionnaires.
I again can note that origin TLD questionary was sent in non-ASCII encoding. It is need to do some efforts to decode it. (Of course, there is first version of it in ASCII which was sent to DNS WG, but it is not the request for TLD hostmasters) It will be usefull to send it again in normal ASCII. - Leonid Yegoshin, LY22
participants (4)
-
Antonio_Blasco Bonito -
Daniel Karrenberg -
egoshin＠ihep.su -
Guy Davies