Re: Addressing the name speculation problem

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 09:06 -0500, Weibel,Stu wrote:
> The Latency Approach
> The Toll Gate Approach
> The Endorsement Approach

Hmm... the endorsement approach is interesting, but I wonder
if it's feasible...

The Toll Gate Approach seems pretty radical; I'm not aware
of any precedent for IANA collecting money.

These approaches are quite responsive to my question...
that is... until I get to...

> Please note that none of these are proposals...

Well... sigh. I found them much more interesting when
I thought they were proposals.

>  They are simply
> responses to Dan's question...  brainstorming *policy* solutions to a
> *policy* problem.  What we are facing at the moment is a *technical*
> solution to a *policy* problem, and I think that this is generally a
> dangerous way to enact policy.  The side effects will be unpredictable
> and pernicious, and a cure, if it should be needed, is likely to be
> harder to implement.

I don't understand that. A provisional registry as a step before
permanent registration looks like a policy solution to a policy
problem to me.

I don't find this effort at separation of concerns very appealing.
I see the job here as designing a system that works as a whole, taking
into consideration resources available in IANA, etc.

I think the system proposed in the draft is workable.
January 3, 2005

It meets the uniqueness requirement in the case of permanent
registrations and saves me the trouble of running my own
provisional registry. 1/2 ;-)

I can imagine other systems might work too... but not
draft-hansen hobbled with a uniqueness requirement on
the provisional registry.

I guess I'll stay tuned to see if any of the other approaches
gets more support or gets refined into operational details.

Dan Connolly, W3C
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 19:06:33 UTC