Who determines Domain naming policy?
Charles Moore
There is a policy for the issuing of Domain names for each of the .au
sub-domains.
Who determined the content of these policies, and who approved the people
who administer (or not) these policies?
Is there someone or some organisation who has legal responsible for the
operation of these sub-domain registration authorities?
--
Charles_Moore______SIGNET SYSTEMS PTY LTD___| /-_|\ |
Email:cmo...@powerup.com.au | / * |
Brisbane, Queensland. | \_,-._/ |
AUSTRALIA. | v |
Fax: +61 7 3256-6794 | |
Charles Moore
>Charles Moore <cmo...@powerup.com.au> writes:
>
>>Quick question?
>
>>There is a policy for the issuing of Domain names for each of the .au
>>sub-domains.
>
>>Who determined the content of these policies, and who approved the people
>>who administer (or not) these policies?
>>Is there someone or some organisation who has legal responsible for the
>>operation of these sub-domain registration authorities?
>
>URL:http://www.air.net/aunic/policies.html
>
>I hope this information is useful.
Thanks.
What I was trying to understand was the authority that established the
au domain and the authority that then created the domains under that.
For most communications domains telephone, other public messaging
services mobiles ect. The authority and hence the rules and policies are
covered (to my best knowledge) bu Austel.
Hence I have someone who has both an administrative and legal liability
for the running of the domains within Aus.
There does not seem (as best I can tell) simular authority for the
Australian internet domains.
As best I can tell from the replies todate, is that the austhority is
actually the USA, rather than Australia. And there is no supporting legal
infrastructure for the current situation.
This gets me to the authority to produce and approve policy for domains,
MX records and IP addresses with Australia and takes legal and
administrative responsiblity these domains?
Interesting?
Ross Sheehy
>What I was trying to understand was the authority that established the
>au domain and the authority that then created the domains under that.
It works on a hierarchical delegation system. In broad terms I believe
the authority for the root domain (.) have delegated responsibility
for the au. domain to Robert Elz (or at least that's how it works
in practice) and in turn the com.au. net.au. edu.au. and so on domains
have been delegated to others. (com.au is still controlled by Robert).
On a smaller scale net.au is managed by the good folk at connect.com.au
and they have delegated responsibility for metro.net.au to me. I am
therefore free to create all sorts of subdomains like mel.metro.net.au
surf.metro.net.au and so on and to delegate those in turn to others.
A cynic would say that policy for a particular domain is determined
by the whim of the person responsible for it. My understanding is that
if the people responsible for the root (.) domain so wished, they
could create and delegate a new aus. domain for Australia (or any
other purpose) and we'd then have an au. domain and an aus. domain.
I might add that this is unlikely to happen.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ross Sheehy r...@metro.net.au Network Administrator,
http://www.metro.net.au Metro Net Australia.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Elz
Charles Moore <cmo...@powerup.com.au> writes:
| What I was trying to understand was the authority that established the
| au domain and the authority that then created the domains under that.
The AU domain was created (nominally) by the domain specification,
which created, or at least allowed to be created, a domain for each
ISO specified two letter country code (IS3166 I think, maybe 3066).
That ISO standard also lists three letter country codes, and numeric
country codes, neither of which is used by the Internet.
Long ago, when there was little networking in Aust, I applied to
administer that domain (AU), and I obtained it (there was no competition).
By what right? Basically, I was first...
I created the domains under AU, or I allowed them to be created when the
demand for them existed by others who wanted to run them in most cases
(all of edu.au com.au and gov.au date back a long way and came from
requests from others - oz.au is even older, even predates .au and was
created along with .au). New domains in AU are almost always created
when, and only when, there is community consensus that they are needed.
| Hence I have someone who has both an administrative and legal liability
| for the running of the domains within Aus.
That would be me, for AU, most of the sub-domains are delegated to
others, who then have the authority over them. Note, when a sub-domain
is delegated, all responsibility for it goes with the delegation, there
is no appeal back to me from a decision of (say) the .edu.au adminisrator.
Similarly, if foobar.com.au is delegated to you, you get to create (or not)
whatever subdomains you do, or don't, like in that domain, no-one can second
guess your decisions and appeal to the com.au administrator.
| There does not seem (as best I can tell) simular authority for the
| Australian internet domains.
There is nothing established by statute, that's right.
| As best I can tell from the replies todate, is that the austhority is
| actually the USA, rather than Australia. And there is no supporting legal
| infrastructure for the current situation.
No legal infrastructure, that's about right. The US has nothing to
do with it however, just as above, once the authority for AU has been
delegated they no longer have any role in the process.
| This gets me to the authority to produce and approve policy for domains,
| MX records and IP addresses with Australia and takes legal and
| administrative responsiblity these domains?
Domains and MX records are the same thing, or more correctly, MX records
are a technical special entity, that the owner of a domain can put in their
domain (or sometimes, be the whole domain) they really have nothing whatever
to do with anything at all. There are technical rules related to MX
records, created by the IETF and documented in RFCs, but they're almost
certainly not what you are concerned about.
IP addresses are a totally different issue, please never confuse them,
even slightly, with domain names. The emerging policy for IP addresses
(which may come to pass with IPv4, or may not, but almost certainly
will for IPv6) is that they are a transitory thing that you get from the
place you connect to, and last only as long as you remain connected there,
when you move connections, you change numbers. Note this applies to
ISPs as much as to end users, when an ISP changes their connection point,
their addresses will change, which will also change the addresses of all users
connected to that ISP. This all relates to routing issues, and how to make
routing work when the internet gets HUGE.
Incidentally, for what it is worth, anyone can participate in the IETF,
and in discussions on these issues. It would be nice to see more
Australians involved, there's only ever been a handful (on all issues,
even less on addressing related ones). Look in the "ietf" directory
via anon ftp, on munnari.oz.au. Particularly look at the 0* and
1* files, you will find lists of working groups there. Each group
then has a directory (sub-directory of ietf) in which you will find
its charter (with details on how to join its mailing list, and what it
is doing). You'll also find minutes of meetings there (the charter
will also say where to find e-mail archives).
Get on the lists that interest you and participate. It is possible to
actively participate in IETF activities without ever attending a meeting
in person. Further, the more Australians we have participating, the
greater the chance that there will eventually be a meeting here, rather
than just in North America and Europe.
kre
Robert Elz
j...@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:
| I guess something that did not come out in Robert's posting is that the
| delegation of the AU domain administration to him was (probably) from the
| IAB (Internet Activities Board), and was (possibly) through the IETF. I am
| sure Robert will correct me if I'm wrong.
From the NIC (before there was an InterNic) and IANA. Neither the IAB nor
IETF have any direct role in the administration of anything.
kre
ps: this reply (2 weeks late) shows just how often I have time to read
news these days...
Jim Breen
>In <4a0psp$6...@harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au>
>j...@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:
>| I guess something that did not come out in Robert's posting is that the
>| delegation of the AU domain administration to him was (probably) from the
>| IAB (Internet Activities Board), and was (possibly) through the IETF. I am
>| sure Robert will correct me if I'm wrong.
>From the NIC (before there was an InterNic) and IANA. Neither the IAB nor
>IETF have any direct role in the administration of anything.
Yes, Robert was right in correcting my mistaken impression that the NIC
came under the IAB. In the labyrinthine ways of the Internet, they actually
are independant.
BTW, is there an update to Cerf's (1989) RFC1120?
--
Jim Breen [ジム・ブリーン@モナシュ大学]
Department of Robotics & Digital Technology. Monash University.
Clayton VIC 3168 Australia (p) +61 3 9905 3298 (f) +61 3 9905 3574
j.b...@rdt.monash.edu.au [http://www.rdt.monash.edu.au/‾jwb/]
Robert Elz
j...@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:
| BTW, is there an update to Cerf's (1989) RFC1120?
1358 - which was then replaced by 1601, and may be due for yet
another revision. For now, 1601 is current. You probably also
want 1602 and 1603 to be complete. 1602 is under active revision
now, 1603 will come next (soon).
kre