<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga] Re: [ORSC.DOMAIN-POLICY] Proposal for ORSC to experiment with top-level handles

Michael and all,

  I agree that what you propose is a good idea to pursue.  However
last I recall the ORSC has no funds of it' own and has not historically
been able to raise any..  If such is still true, how would you propose
funding this "Experiment"?

Michael J. O'Donnell wrote:

> I propose that ORSC execute an experiment with an organization of DNS
> zones that (1) can be executed at a modest cost entirely with the
> current deployment of DNS software, (2) does not interfere in any way
> with anyone's existing DNS operation, (3) has a chance to reduce the
> appearance of the root as a natural monopoly, reducing the impact of
> governance on DNS in favor of bottom-up consensus. Because of 1&2, I
> think the downside risk is negligible. Because of 3, I think the
> experiment is worth the modest effort required.
> I propose a high-level zone of meaningless handles, assigned
> promiscuously by an automated registry to all who request them. They
> look as ugly as IP numbers, they lack the mnemonic and semantic value of
> well-chosen domain names, but they offer the permanant ownership
> intended for normal domain names, without the cost of defending a name
> against challenges.
> For immediate implementation, the handle zone can appear in two places
> in the DNS name space:
> 1. In the intersection of ORSC and ICANN-approved name space as a
> 3d-level domain under open-rsc.org.
> 2. In the ORSC name space alone, as a new top-level domain with a name
> chosen to minimize the chance of collision.
> To be conservative,  there's nothing wrong with implementing 1 by
> itself, and thinking as long as necessary about the slightly bolder 2.
> The handle zone allows each Internet users to acquire a permanent slice
> of global name space, indexed in a semantically unbiased form. There may
> be imaginative new uses of such a resource, but the interesting one for
> the ORSC mission is that any agent may operate a DNS zone under a handle
> with no authorization from anyone else. If the idea catches on, users
> may select name spaces by bookmarking handles, browser creators may
> incorporate popular name spaces in URL-completion features, the handle
> zone may eventually be promoted by consensus to root status with legacy
> zones linked in through their own handles. If not, there is very little
> to lose.
> There are only a few important design decisions to make up front, and
> even a mistaken design will yield interesting experience. Handles should
> probably be created as secure hashes of randomly generated public keys.
> This allows for either central assignment or self-assignment by
> individual users. The latter may allow ORSC to avoid all authority and
> therefore all responsibility for the behavior of individual handle owners.
> Mike O'Donnell
> ----------------------
> Yes, this is essentially Bob Frankston's dotDNS idea
> (http://www.circleid.com/article.php?id=P225_0_1_0_C). I think the idea
> has often been evaluated in the wrong way, by comparing the utility of a
> handle to the admittedly greater utility of a nice domain name. Instead,
> compare the selection of a top-level handle to the selection of an IP
> address of a name server.
> I've been drafting a variety of articles on the topic
> (http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~odonnell/Citizen/Network_Identifiers/).
> _______________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe please see http://lists.open-rsc.org

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801