[discuss] A final revision of Problem Statement No. 1?

Sun Feb 16 00:27:53 UTC 2014

Jeanette,

On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:37 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
> David, can you elaborate as to  how you would see these 3 tasks being organizationally seperated from each other?

There are a variety of ways this could be done, e.g., have all three done by separate independent entities (probably too inefficient), have only the signing done by an independent party, or have edit and sign be done by the same party but have the publication step verify that the change that was edited/signed corresponds to what was requested. There are undoubtedly other ways of partition the task.

The key point is that the current functional decomposition of the root zone data management function is somewhat arbitrary to meet particular policy goals (whatever they might be -- my impression was that it was to keep ICANN from running amok, but that's just a guess). It may be that a different functional decomposition is more appropriate in the future, depending on what the policy requirements are.  IMHO, a key policy consideration should be to minimize the chances of a unilateral out of policy change, particularly in a world where the threat of breach of contract is no long applicable.

Regards,
-drc

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140215/b51e3f3f/signature.asc>