[dns-operations] When TLDs have apex A records

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:

...
> 	... my inputs wer verbal... 
...

Feel free to ignore, however, (a) informing one or more members of the 
Board does not transform the Board in itself into a body committed to, 
or capable of, forming a view on a technical issue, and at best may 
cause some Board member(s) to debate the correctness or maturity of a 
policy recommendation made by an instrumentality of the Board (staff or 
a standing, or special advisory committee) when that recommendation is 
brought to the Board for a vote, and (b) creates no written public record.

The problem with (a) is that it creates a Board ignores or second 
guesses experts policy culture, and there is no shortage of parties 
attempting, some with considerable success, to influence Board outcomes, 
and eliminate the institutional roles of fact finding, evaluation and 
recommendation.

The problem with (b) is that it provides no rational basis for 
evaluation of a claim, as k.'s query points out, and creates a Board 
which makes choices with no possibility of informed public participation.

My recommendation, as the legacy operators and others with significant 
influence are pursuing a cameral policy model, one size for pre-ICANN 
and ICANN 2000-2007 registries, and one size for all ICANN post-2008 
registries, is that you, and anyone else with an informed view on the 
issue, make the case for deprecated-X. Then put the case for 
deprecated-X to the public record.

Eric