PTA is hosting a meeting at PTA HQ, Sector F5/1,Islamabad tomorrow at 11AM "to discuss .pk domain issues and devise future roadmap". On behalf of Mr. Naveed Ul Haq, Assistant Director (ICT) PTA, invitation is extended to all who are willing to contribute to this discussion.
For further details, please contact Mr. Naveed Ul Haq at (051) 9203911.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> wrote: > Folks,
> PTA is hosting a meeting at PTA HQ, Sector F5/1,Islamabad tomorrow at 11AM > "to discuss .pk domain issues and devise future roadmap". On behalf of Mr. > Naveed Ul Haq, Assistant Director (ICT) PTA, invitation is extended to all > who are willing to contribute to this discussion.
> For further details, please contact Mr. Naveed Ul Haq at (051) 9203911.
A lot of people including myself have complained regarding this 11th hour notice of the meeting. Quite a few people whose opinion matter will not be showing up today for this meeting. I think they will announce another meeting after today's session. Also, there is a surprise announcement as well from PTA. They are really keeping it hush hush as of now. :)
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Faisal Khan <babushk...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why doesn't PTA announce this in advance --- way in advance, as anything to > do with .pk and the Government is worth taking note of.....
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> Folks,
>> PTA is hosting a meeting at PTA HQ, Sector F5/1,Islamabad tomorrow at 11AM >> "to discuss .pk domain issues and devise future roadmap". On behalf of Mr. >> Naveed Ul Haq, Assistant Director (ICT) PTA, invitation is extended to all >> who are willing to contribute to this discussion.
>> For further details, please contact Mr. Naveed Ul Haq at (051) 9203911.
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> wrote: > Faisal,
> A lot of people including myself have complained regarding this 11th hour > notice of the meeting. Quite a few people whose opinion matter will not be > showing up today for this meeting. I think they will announce another > meeting after today's session. Also, there is a surprise announcement as > well from PTA. They are really keeping it hush hush as of now. :)
> -- > Zaeem
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Faisal Khan <babushk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why doesn't PTA announce this in advance --- way in advance, as anything >> to do with .pk and the Government is worth taking note of.....
>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>> PTA is hosting a meeting at PTA HQ, Sector F5/1,Islamabad tomorrow at >>> 11AM "to discuss .pk domain issues and devise future roadmap". On behalf of >>> Mr. Naveed Ul Haq, Assistant Director (ICT) PTA, invitation is extended to >>> all who are willing to contribute to this discussion.
>>> For further details, please contact Mr. Naveed Ul Haq at (051) 9203911.
PTA (generally) would be obliged to provide a consultation paper on this issue - and hopefully we would be able to provide input into this matter.
I'm not sure how many of you saw the Spam/Phishing/Virus paper that PTA had put out fro comments, albeit it was a well written/researched paper, but from an operators' standpoint/viewpoint it was suggesting quite a few measures which are laced with costs and I would be surprized if the customer would be willing to pay. Also the onus of spam protection was so heavy on the operators (ISPs, etc.) that it was not even funny!
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> wrote: > Faisal,
> A lot of people including myself have complained regarding this 11th hour > notice of the meeting. Quite a few people whose opinion matter will not be > showing up today for this meeting. I think they will announce another > meeting after today's session. Also, there is a surprise announcement as > well from PTA. They are really keeping it hush hush as of now. :)
> -- > Zaeem
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Faisal Khan <babushk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why doesn't PTA announce this in advance --- way in advance, as anything >> to do with .pk and the Government is worth taking note of.....
>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>> PTA is hosting a meeting at PTA HQ, Sector F5/1,Islamabad tomorrow at >>> 11AM "to discuss .pk domain issues and devise future roadmap". On behalf of >>> Mr. Naveed Ul Haq, Assistant Director (ICT) PTA, invitation is extended to >>> all who are willing to contribute to this discussion.
>>> For further details, please contact Mr. Naveed Ul Haq at (051) 9203911.
Sorry for the double, even if PTA did take over .PKNIC, what is the objective? If price is an issue (which I think it is), and even if it goes down to Rs. 100/domain/year - the question is - would the general masses opt for massive domain registrations and related hosting?
How would a slow-moving government organization handle conflict resolution?
Who would be the architect of the system (presumably, NTC? PTCL?)
Is PTA's interest in this as a watchdog or facilitator or owner? If oversight is the main reason, I am happy, if ownership and operations are the end goals, I would be nervous.
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> wrote: > Faisal,
> A lot of people including myself have complained regarding this 11th hour > notice of the meeting. Quite a few people whose opinion matter will not be > showing up today for this meeting. I think they will announce another > meeting after today's session. Also, there is a surprise announcement as > well from PTA. They are really keeping it hush hush as of now. :)
> -- > Zaeem
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Faisal Khan <babushk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why doesn't PTA announce this in advance --- way in advance, as anything >> to do with .pk and the Government is worth taking note of.....
>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>> PTA is hosting a meeting at PTA HQ, Sector F5/1,Islamabad tomorrow at >>> 11AM "to discuss .pk domain issues and devise future roadmap". On behalf of >>> Mr. Naveed Ul Haq, Assistant Director (ICT) PTA, invitation is extended to >>> all who are willing to contribute to this discussion.
>>> For further details, please contact Mr. Naveed Ul Haq at (051) 9203911.
Just came back from the meeting which was an interesting one..the surprise was the presence of Ashar Nisar of PKNIC. I will be posting the minutes of the meeting later on. Answering your questions inline
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Faisal Khan <babushk...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry for the double, even if PTA did take over .PKNIC, what is the > objective? If price is an issue (which I think it is), and even if it goes > down to Rs. 100/domain/year - the question is - would the general masses opt > for massive domain registrations and related hosting?
It's not an issue as of now but it has been pointed out as an issue by some.
> How would a slow-moving government organization handle conflict resolution?
Barrister Zahid Jamil pointed out that his law firm (Jamil Associates probably?) is providing Domain Name Dispute Resolution Services in Pakistan since 2006 free of cost. Djuice.pk and standardchartered.pk were pointed out as the cases they have handled.
> Who would be the architect of the system (presumably, NTC? PTCL?)
NTC if the government is involved but this is what all (except the gov itself) are trying to avoid. Maybe a proposal solicitation from the private sector to take control of .pk registry services which seems highly unlikely as of now.
> Is PTA's interest in this as a watchdog or facilitator or owner? If > oversight is the main reason, I am happy, if ownership and operations are > the end goals, I would be nervous.
Facilitator and watchdog. Owner is not possible due to ICANN laws.
I had the fear about it PKNIC going into legislation and almost same happend. Zahid Jamils Presence ( sorry zahid no offence but you seems to have become to party on this issue :) ) along with ashar was a clear indication.
Unfortunately every one forgot the end user expereince and quality of service and started taking it into legal reference "the company is registered in US and ICANN has this and that policy"
I would personaly call it a non conclusive meeting, the only interesting thing ( and if PKNIC is not stubbourn about it ) is that we might be getting an anycast instanse (mirror) . This is what we have proposed intially.
Other than that Ashar assured the audiance that they are going to improve the Quality of service related matters.
Pitty that our legal system and processes can cater the word tweaking but is not focus to end user requirements and expereince. Another thing i found out ( ashar was unable to explain ) that the domain which we register through PKNIC actually worth 1600 PKR for two years - not sure though whos taking the 200 Rs per domain per year, as Ashar claimed that he is the registry not the registrar.
Any how Zaeem seems to be sharing the the detailed minutes......
Good Day, Haris Shamsi
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just came back from the meeting which was an interesting one..the surprise > was the presence of Ashar Nisar of PKNIC. I will be posting the minutes of > the meeting later on. Answering your questions inline
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Faisal Khan <babushk...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> Sorry for the double, even if PTA did take over .PKNIC, what is the >> objective? If price is an issue (which I think it is), and even if it goes >> down to Rs. 100/domain/year - the question is - would the general masses opt >> for massive domain registrations and related hosting?
> It's not an issue as of now but it has been pointed out as an issue by > some.
>> How would a slow-moving government organization handle conflict >> resolution?
> Barrister Zahid Jamil pointed out that his law firm (Jamil Associates > probably?) is providing Domain Name Dispute Resolution Services in Pakistan > since 2006 free of cost. Djuice.pk and standardchartered.pk were pointed > out as the cases they have handled.
>> Who would be the architect of the system (presumably, NTC? PTCL?)
> NTC if the government is involved but this is what all (except the gov > itself) are trying to avoid. Maybe a proposal solicitation from the private > sector to take control of .pk registry services which seems highly unlikely > as of now.
>> Is PTA's interest in this as a watchdog or facilitator or owner? If >> oversight is the main reason, I am happy, if ownership and operations are >> the end goals, I would be nervous.
> Facilitator and watchdog. Owner is not possible due to ICANN laws.
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Haris Shamsi <cybersha...@gmail.com> wrote: > I had the fear about it PKNIC going into legislation and almost same > happend. Zahid Jamils Presence ( sorry zahid no offence but you seems to > have become to party on this issue :) ) along with ashar was a clear > indication.
> Unfortunately every one forgot the end user expereince and quality of > service and started taking it into legal reference "the company is > registered in US and ICANN has this and that policy"
> I would personaly call it a non conclusive meeting, the only interesting > thing ( and if PKNIC is not stubbourn about it ) is that we might be getting > an anycast instanse (mirror) . This is what we have proposed intially.
> Other than that Ashar assured the audiance that they are going to improve > the Quality of service related matters.
> Pitty that our legal system and processes can cater the word tweaking but > is not focus to end user requirements and expereince. Another thing i found > out ( ashar was unable to explain ) that the domain which we register > through PKNIC actually worth 1600 PKR for two years - not sure though whos > taking the 200 Rs per domain per year, as Ashar claimed that he is the > registry not the registrar.
> Any how Zaeem seems to be sharing the the detailed minutes......
> Good Day, > Haris Shamsi
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> Just came back from the meeting which was an interesting one..the surprise >> was the presence of Ashar Nisar of PKNIC. I will be posting the minutes of >> the meeting later on. Answering your questions inline
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Faisal Khan <babushk...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Sorry for the double, even if PTA did take over .PKNIC, what is the >>> objective? If price is an issue (which I think it is), and even if it goes >>> down to Rs. 100/domain/year - the question is - would the general masses opt >>> for massive domain registrations and related hosting?
>> It's not an issue as of now but it has been pointed out as an issue by >> some.
>>> How would a slow-moving government organization handle conflict >>> resolution?
>> Barrister Zahid Jamil pointed out that his law firm (Jamil Associates >> probably?) is providing Domain Name Dispute Resolution Services in Pakistan >> since 2006 free of cost. Djuice.pk and standardchartered.pk were pointed >> out as the cases they have handled.
>>> Who would be the architect of the system (presumably, NTC? PTCL?)
>> NTC if the government is involved but this is what all (except the gov >> itself) are trying to avoid. Maybe a proposal solicitation from the private >> sector to take control of .pk registry services which seems highly unlikely >> as of now.
>>> Is PTA's interest in this as a watchdog or facilitator or owner? If >>> oversight is the main reason, I am happy, if ownership and operations are >>> the end goals, I would be nervous.
>> Facilitator and watchdog. Owner is not possible due to ICANN laws.
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Haris Shamsi <cybersha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I had the fear about it PKNIC going into legislation and almost same
> > happend. Zahid Jamils Presence ( sorry zahid no offence but you seems to
> > have become to party on this issue :) ) along with ashar was a clear
> > indication.
> > Unfortunately every one forgot the end user expereince and quality of
> > service and started taking it into legal reference "the company is
> > registered in US and ICANN has this and that policy"
> > I would personaly call it a non conclusive meeting, the only interesting
> > thing ( and if PKNIC is not stubbourn about it ) is that we might be getting
> > an anycast instanse (mirror) . This is what we have proposed intially.
> > Other than that Ashar assured the audiance that they are going to improve
> > the Quality of service related matters.
> > Pitty that our legal system and processes can cater the word tweaking but
> > is not focus to end user requirements and expereince. Another thing i found
> > out ( ashar was unable to explain ) that the domain which we register
> > through PKNIC actually worth 1600 PKR for two years - not sure though whos
> > taking the 200 Rs per domain per year, as Ashar claimed that he is the
> > registry not the registrar.
> > Any how Zaeem seems to be sharing the the detailed minutes......
> > Good Day,
> > Haris Shamsi
> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Zaeem Arshad <zaeem.ars...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> Just came back from the meeting which was an interesting one..the surprise
> >> was the presence of Ashar Nisar of PKNIC. I will be posting the minutes of
> >> the meeting later on. Answering your questions inline
> >> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Faisal Khan <babushk...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Sorry for the double, even if PTA did take over .PKNIC, what is the
> >>> objective? If price is an issue (which I think it is), and even if it goes
> >>> down to Rs. 100/domain/year - the question is - would the general masses opt
> >>> for massive domain registrations and related hosting?
> >> It's not an issue as of now but it has been pointed out as an issue by
> >> some.
> >>> How would a slow-moving government organization handle conflict
> >>> resolution?
> >> Barrister Zahid Jamil pointed out that his law firm (Jamil Associates
> >> probably?) is providing Domain Name Dispute Resolution Services in Pakistan
> >> since 2006 free of cost. Djuice.pk and standardchartered.pk were pointed
> >> out as the cases they have handled.
> >>> Who would be the architect of the system (presumably, NTC? PTCL?)
> >> NTC if the government is involved but this is what all (except the gov
> >> itself) are trying to avoid. Maybe a proposal solicitation from the private
> >> sector to take control of .pk registry services which seems highly unlikely
> >> as of now.
> >>> Is PTA's interest in this as a watchdog or facilitator or owner? If
> >>> oversight is the main reason, I am happy, if ownership and operations are
> >>> the end goals, I would be nervous.
> >> Facilitator and watchdog. Owner is not possible due to ICANN laws.
