Sounds like eDNS... and that model does work IMHO. On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
With all this craziness in DNS land lately (the internic going nutz, the root domains wigging this morning, etc.), I had come up with on the craziest thoguhts I think I ever thunk (!!). Anyway, what about a structure like this:
1) Root domain name server operators (RDNSO) -- a selected 10 or 15 people in the US and abroad would provide thier *own* equipment, the bandwidth, et al. The would do this *for profit*. They would be reviewed, approved, and contracted by the 'internet community' as a whole, maybe that community represented by a commitee or a board. These people would get PAID for having the TLD servers. By who? See #2 # #3.
2) Forward Registries -- Everyone has been complaining about how bad the internic, etc., and why should we have to pay for domains, etc. So, my idea is this. The registries would *pay* the RDNSO to host thier TLD's on thier server. This would provide a fair, and equal way for competition among registries, without having multiple '.'s (ala alternic), and wouldn't compromise the RDNSO, beacuse if they screw around and listen to the wrong registry, etc., they would be thrown out. The registries can charge anything they want; but, the consumer will have the advantage of choosing which regsitry they want to use. The only disadvantage is that a TLD (com, edu, net, etc.) is 'owned' by a particular registry. But, hey, thats why you go to Ford if you want a Taurus.
3) Reverse Registries -- pretty much the same as #2, but in the ongoing effort to conserve ip space (tm), the formation of multiple reverse registries should be regulated (excuse the term, but nothing else really applies). I think the end-all decision of who gets to be a reverse registry is by the IANA, then approved by the board in #1.
Any comments?
---
"Don't go with a spineless ISP; we have more backbone."
Alex Rubenstein -- alex@nac.net -- KC2BUO -- www.nac.net net @ccess corporation, 201-983-0725 -- 201-983-0725