Re: Definition of Registry

[Olivier Guillard <Olivier.Guillard@nic.fr>]

Thanks for those inputs, I try to compile (as far as my
english allow it).

> Thanks for your questions, hope I have answered a few :-)

Yep, and also reminded me some english lessons with the
plural and singular in latin language with "criterium",
"criteria" :)

Olivier

le 09 Jan, Peter Mott a écrit :
> > > > We have different views of the world.  Through my eyes I see
> > domain name
> > > > registration  being the execution of a legal contract between
> > the registrar
> > > > and the registrant.  The public record of that contract is
> > the insertion of
> > > > the name into the registry database.
> >
> >
> > To clarify the issues, could you please precise what you call "registry
> > database"?
> 
> The registry database or register is the central repository from which zone
> files are published. It is administered by the registry operator under
> contract from the TLD manager.
> 
> > The registrant consideration is surely an important issue, but it
> > might not
> > be the only one, especially for a ccTLD zone.
> 
> I agree.  It is important to have an independant entity to define what must
> be part of the registrar - registrant contract and what perhaps must not.
> Many folk think this a registry role.  I have come to the conclusion after
> studing the various roles and relationships that the TLD manager is the
> entity to set such requirements.
> 
> In most situations I would see the TLD manager as being a not for profit
> organisation owned by members who represent the community of interest for
> the namespace in question.
> 
> The registry operator can then focus on its core business, that of enabling
> registrars accredited by the TLD manager to enter into registration
> contracts with registrants, and record such contracts in the register.
> 
> > The .fr registry is one of the first that has distinguished the databases
> > maintaining from the furniture of services linked to domainames! At that
> > time NSI was selling domainnames and maintaning the . , .com,
> > .net and .org
> > db :)
> 
> I would prefer to see the central register containing only those elements of
> data that are required to allow shared access by competing registrars.
> Whilst it is possible (indeed likely) for the TLD manager to require
> additional attributes, as soon as you start adding them issues such as data
> ownership and commercial value come into play.  If you keep the value of the
> data in the shared registry as low as possible, this minimises opportunity
> for capture and also keeps cost of maintaining it down.
> 
> > The .fr zone is a ressource that is aimed to serve and promote a
> > particular
> > comunity designated by those two letters. It's essential for us
> > to distinguish
> > the commercial function (domain name sale) from the political one (charter
> > and usage referential writting).
> 
> Sure, the TLD manager can set whatever requirements by way of contract with
> accredited registrars.  But remember for the TLD to be successful (have a
> good selection of registrars for registrants to choose from) then the
> requirements have to be acceptable to the registrar community as well as the
> registrant community.
> 
> > What do you mean exactly by "accreditated entity". On which criteriums,
> > defined by who and by which process do you feel the accreditation should
> > happen?
> 
> The TLD manager would determine the requirements for becoming a registrar.
> The accreditation criteria should address the needs of the community of
> interest the TLD serves.
> 
> > We don't try to prescribe to anyone what he has to do, we just think that
> > the .fr internet zone should grow with the respect of a "charter".
> 
> I endorse such an approach.  As long as the charter is an accurate
> reflection of the community of interest rather than a top level view of what
> one or two folk think the community needs :-)
> 
> > ".mu" has been delegated for the maurician island, have you ever
> > been their? go to http://www.mu,
> 
> I am fairly sure IANA/Jon Postel did not have this approach in mind for a
> TLD. Such business models are possible because RFC1591 has not evolved to
> address issues that have appeared as commercial players get involved in the
> Internet.
> 
> Thanks for your questions, hope I have answered a few :-)
> 
> Regards
> 
> Peter Mott
> Chief Enthusiast
> 2day.com
> -/-
> 

-- 
Olivier