Sorry to bring this up, it may be out of the confines of the NANOG realm,
but since the bulk of name lookups come from major network providers such
as Sprint, MCI, UUnet and the rest, this seems like the logical place to
post this.
Over the past 10 months, there has been escalating talk about the new self
appointed registries out there. Major news papers, magazines and other
periodicals have been publishing that "the change is coming". Ultimately,
the actual change rests at the hands of every user who runs a nameserver,
for they are the ones who actually have the root server cache. A recent
article in the Star Tribune, I believe stated that MCI is siding with the
Internet Ad Hoc society and is going to support these new registries. Now,
MCI is a major player in the US and if they actually DO start adding new
root servers to their cache, there might be a major change in the
Internet.
I'm curious as to how many other network providers are even thinking about
changing their root server caches just because some self appointed society
tells them to. I'm confused as to how this sort of thing got SO out of
control. I have yet to see an article anywhere countering these people.
As a lot of you know, the Internet is all politics. What people see in
real life really effects them when they go online. I have talked to a
large number of people and they all believe that these new TLDs and
registries will be appearing in the next 3 to 4 months.
The people on this list have a tremendous amount of power to change the
Internet, but unless you use this force in real life to educate the
public, well... things like this will continue to happen.
If the Internet Ad Hoc society actually does convince everyone to switch
over, then there is a major problem. Does this mean any group of people
who wants to make rules and can get enough publicity can make it happen
without any sort of actual reasoning behind it? Can I declare an Internet
tax and if I get enough magazines to print it, actually do it?
This is a scary thought.
Jordan
I'm not sure what "switch over" you refer to. The IAHC work that
you refer to was done at the request and with the approval of IANA, the
responsible agent for the existing DNS root. Implementation of the IAHC
plan does not require changing the communities use of roots (i.e., no
re-targeting) and the only change to the existing roots is the addition of
some top-level domain points. Addition of TLDs has been done many times
over the years.
d/
Sorry to bring this up, it may be out of the confines of the NANOG realm,
but since the bulk of name lookups come from major network providers such
as Sprint, MCI, UUnet and the rest, this seems like the logical place to
post this.
Over the past 10 months, there has been escalating talk about the new self
appointed registries out there. Major news papers, magazines and other
periodicals have been publishing that "the change is coming". Ultimately,
the actual change rests at the hands of every user who runs a nameserver,
for they are the ones who actually have the root server cache. A recent
article in the Star Tribune, I believe stated that MCI is siding with the
Internet Ad Hoc society and is going to support these new registries. Now,
MCIis a major player in the US and if they actually DO start adding new
root servers to their cache, there might be a major change in the
Internet.
I'm curious as to how many other network providers are even thinking about
changing their root server caches just because some self appointed society
tells them to. I'm confused as to how this sort of thing got SO out of
control. I have yet to see an article anywhere countering these people.
As a lot of you know, the Internet is all politics. What people see in
real life really effects them when they go online. I have talked to a
large number of people and they all believe that these new TLDs and
registries will be appearing in the next 3 to 4 months.
The people on this list have a tremendous amount of power to change the
Internet, but unless you use this force in real life to educate the
public, well... things like this will continue to happen.
If the Internet Ad Hoc society actually does convince everyone to switch
over, then there is a major problem. Does this mean any group of people
who wants to make rules and can get enough publicity can make it happen
without any sort of actual reasoning behind it? Can I declare an Internet
tax and if I get enough magazines to print it, actually do it?
No one has mentioned anything about adding new root nameservers. Of the
over 25 signatories (so far), MCI is just one. UUnet, Digital, France
Telecom, EFF, are others that come to mind. The IAHC was selected by IAB,
IANA, ISOC, INTA, WIPO, ITU and NSF. The entire discussion was held in
public covering 8000 emails over a period of 3 months. You can see all
details at www.iahc.org including the MoU that will be signed at the end
of April in Geneva at the ITU. No one is adding root servers and gTLDs as
they wish. Please do not go by what you read in 3 paragraph newspaper
articles since much of what is stated is inaccurate. Go to the site and
go thru all the materials.
This is a scary thought.
Please read all background material.
Jordan
--
Jordan Mendelson : www.wserv.com/~jordy
Web Services, Inc. : www.wserv.com
Hank Nussbacher
IAHC member
[the views expressed above belong to the author and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the other IAHC members]
But the IANA does not own majority of those servers.
In fact NSI owns many of them, and they do not appear to be consenting to
this "work". In fact, the recent Reuters story indicates that they have
every intention of releasing their *OWN* plan to resolve this issue.
Since several of the root servers are THEIRS, and they appear to have their
own plan, what does that say for the validity of the IAHC work Mr. Crocker?
There is further the issue of the four which are federally funded in whole
or part, and the fact that a plan which shuts out competing business models
may well need congressional authorization (since it is a monopoly grant of
power to a foreign organization and government) in order to be legal.
Of course, none of this seems to bother the IAHC.
Then again, the IAHC has failed to substantiate that any of the IANA servers
will actually *implement* any of their recommendations. The root server
operators have also been curiously silent on this same point.
Where is the list of signatories Hank?
Is it public?
If not, why not?
I am still trying to figure out how or why the EFF was listed as a signer.
It's true that a couple of us did have a long conversation with Jon Postel
about the issues and the IAHC's efforts, but we were searching for the
facts. We have yet to make a public statement as to whether or not we're
going to sign, as, with most quickly pushed through policy, it does have
it's flaws. You'll know if and when the EFF is going to get behind this
when *we* issue a press release.
>No one has mentioned anything about adding new root nameservers. Of the
>over 25 signatories (so far), MCI is just one. UUnet, Digital, France
>Telecom, EFF, are others that come to mind. The IAHC was selected by IAB,
>IANA, ISOC, INTA, WIPO, ITU and NSF. The entire discussion was held in
>public covering 8000 emails over a period of 3 months. You can see all
>details at www.iahc.org including the MoU that will be signed at the end
>of April inGeneva at the ITU. No one is adding root servers and gTLDs as
>they wish. Please do not go by what you read in 3 paragraph newspaper
>articles since much of what is stated is inaccurate. Go to the site and
>go thru all the materials.
I am still trying to figure out how or why the EFF was listed as a signer.
It's true that a couple of us did have a long conversation with Jon Postel
about the issues and the IAHC's efforts, but we were searching for the
facts. We have yet to make a public statement as to whether or not we're
going to sign, as, with most quickly pushed through policy, it does have
it's flaws. You'll know if and when the EFF is going to get behind this
when *we* issue a press release.
John Gilmore was the one that indicated that EFF is ready to sign.
_______________________________________________________________________
Wayne D. Correia Electronic Frontier Foundation tel: +1.415.436.9333
<wayne@eff.org> 1550 Bryant Street fax: +1.415.436.9993
San Francisco, CA 94103 USA <http://www.eff.org>
Hank Nussbacher
>
> No one has mentioned anything about adding new root nameservers. Of the
> over 25 signatories (so far), MCI is just one. UUnet, Digital, France
> Telecom, EFF, are others that come to mind. The IAHC was selected by IAB,
> IANA, ISOC, INTA, WIPO, ITU and NSF. The entire discussion was held in
> public covering 8000 emails over a period of 3 months. You can see all
> details at www.iahc.org including the MoU that will be signed at the end
> of April in Geneva at the ITU. No one is adding root servers and gTLDs as
> they wish. Please do not go by what you read in 3 paragraph newspaper
> articles since much of what is stated is inaccurate. Go to the site and
> go thru allthe materials.
>
> Hank Nussbacher
> IAHC member
> [the views expressed above belong to the author and do not
> necessarily reflect the views of the other IAHC members]
Where is the list of signatories Hank?
Is it public?
Of course it is: http://www.itu.int/net-itu/dnsmeet/
The list is not up to date since we can't keep up with all the positive
responses. We did manage to get Globecomm in and will continue to update
the page of signatories as time permits.
If not, why not?
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
> 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, http://www.mcs.net/
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| NOWServing 56kbps DIGITAL on our analog lines!
Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Hank Nussbacher
IAHC member
[the views expressed above belong to the author and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the other IAHC members]
No one has mentioned anything about adding new root nameservers. Of the
over 25 signatories (so far), MCI is just one. UUnet, Digital, France
Telecom, EFF, are others that come to mind. The IAHC was selected by IAB,
IANA, ISOC, INTA, WIPO, ITU and NSF. The entire discussion was held in
public covering 8000 emails over a period of 3 months.
And that was just the tail end of almost two years of public discussions
with many more thousands of emails, several one-day conferences, some
papers published in various journals, etc...
You can see all
details at www.iahc.org including the MoU that will be signed at the end
of April in Geneva at the ITU.
And note that any network operator or Internet Service Provider can sign
this MoU and by signing it, will gain a position on the Policy Advisory
Board that ultimately will influence the future course of the DNS. It is
not neccessary to travel to Geneva to sign the document. Simply print out
the document from the website, change the line at the bottom that says
"done in Geneva" to reflect the name of your city, print it out, sign it,
and snail mail the signed copy to the Internet Society, 12020 Sunrise
Valley Drive, Suite 210, Reston, VA 20191, USA.
> This is a scary thought.
Please read all background material.
That's even scarier! 
But maybe you weren't including the two years of mailing list archives in
your suggestion? It actually doesn't take too long to read the Final
Report of the IAHC from Feb 4th and the MoU itself from Feb 28th.
NOTE: I have set the reply-to for this message to newdom@ar.com
If you want to subscribe to that list to talk about new top level domains
send your "subscribe" message to newdom-request@ar.com
Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting
Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-250-546-3049
http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael@memra.com