/

Domain name guru weighs in on overhaul planning process

The guardian of Internet domain naming, Jon Postel, was not able to attend last week's historical meeting in Reston, Va., but according to attendees, his presence was still felt.

Postel, the head of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), sent a written statement, encouraging all parties that had been feuding over the past year to come together to agree on a plan for handing over the domain infrastructure to the private sector. IANA is responsible for attaching domains to IP addresses. Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI) is the current dispenser of common domains such as .com, .org and .net.

Attendees, such as NSI's Dave Holzman, took the statement, which was read aloud during the meeting, as a sign that the battles between the old guard of Internet domains and the newer business side could be subsiding, at least for a while.

Indeed, Postel is anxious to put a new plan in action. For the past few months, he has come under fire for his actions regarding the government's domain plan, including a test he performed without notifying the Clinton administration and his backing of a plan that was abandoned by the administration. Online Reporter Sandra Gittlen asked him about the series of meetings scheduled over the next few months by the government to come up with a new plan and the newfound good will among enemies it has sparked.

Q: How do you feel about the cooperation between NSI and the Internet Society?

A: Cooperation is good. I am looking forward to learning how NSI will change its business to adapt to the ideas about an open competition in domain name registration.

Q:What do you think the outcome of these meetings, including the Geneva and Asia-Pacific dates, will be?

A:The goal of the meetings is to come to a consensus about the structure for a new organization to carry on the IANA's traditional role in coordinating the few necessary central management functions of the Internet. I think the meetings of the last two days and those planned for the next few weeks have and will make substantial progress towards that consensus.

Q:Do you think the government's approach - hand's off - was the best one to take?

A: Yes. I think it is best that the technical and user communities come together to form this on a consensus basis.

Q:What are the top three things that you think need to be decided from these meetings?

A: Hmm. I think it is like the "three rules of real estate: location, location, location," in this case we want the outcome to be consensus, consensus and consensus.

It would be interesting to see if the suggestions I've made [see http://www.iana.org/discussion.html] are at all close to something a consensus can agree on.