Association of Trustworthy Roots?

It isn't just that the root operators are silent.

On the registrar's list there has been only five items on the subject.

1 Mark Jeftovic (easydns) who is on NANOG, copying the RC list.
2 Ross Rader (tucows) who is not, blowing it off,
  no delta between authoritative and caching servers
3 Mark asking Ross if he's had coffee yet, and
  yes delta between authoritative and caching servers
4 Ross, yes he's had two cups and NANOG is a ton of mindless conjecture
  and pretty silly
5 Mark replies with's motd and ssl alert

That's it.

On the registry mailing list ... well, I'm not on the registry constituency
mailing list, I haven't been since I left NeuStar and .biz and .us (urk) and
.cn (fun), so I don't know, but my guess is the answer is somewhere near zero.

How about the IPC mailing list ... well, I never could get a group of
indigenous IPR experts admitted to the ICANN IPC, so since the Berlin
meeting I've not been on the IPC list, but again, knowing the actors as
people, I'm going to buy an integer between -1 and +1.

So, after IPC and Registries and Registrars, where would anyone expect to
find a policy interest in the area, since ISP/C is wicked dead?


It isn't just that the root operators are silent.

wrt the panix debacle, why wouldn't the root operators have been silent?
the root zone was continuously available from all published servers with
excellent rtt, no measurable congestion, no inconsistencies, and up-to-date
serial numbers. under those conditions, root operators will be silent.