eDNS - Temporary Freeze

What Paul has neglected to mention is that if NSI, tomorrow, decided to
honor Image Online Design's .WEB (say, because perhaps they sued NSI to do
exactly that, and NSI folded rather than fight) you'd publish Mr. Ambler's
.WEB and not the IAHCs.

I guess that would be up to the IANA. If NSI ignored the IANA's wishes
(recall that the IAHC is the result of an IANA plan) and started editing
IANA's "." zone without authorization, I would expect the IANA to send mail
to the root name server operators saying "please fetch the root zone from
somewhere else". This is pretty unlikely -- the current InterNIC
contractor knows full well that ".", MIL, GOV, and EDU are owned by others.
(I believe that this was the sense of their answer to PGPMedia, too.)

A defacto checkmate, as it were.

This would be more like NSI deciding to take its own king off the board.
Since they stand to make truckloads of money as an IAHC shared registry,
this seems like it would be a really stupid thing for them to do, Tom
Newell's recent idiotic comments notwithstanding.

Or, if NSI, tomorrow, defined a process and actually executed it, whatever
it might be, that new TLDs would go into the so-called "IANA" roots, and
those might include a very different view of the world than the IAHCs, or
yours for that matter.

Once again this would be up to the IANA.

The truth is, they're NSI's roots. In fact, the truth is, you've admitted
that NSI has actually paid for at least part of the server which you host.

The current InterNIC contractor doesn't control the content of my server, but
they do tend to act as a coordinating resource. I guarantee that if the owner
of the MIL, GOV, EDU, or "." zones sent mail to the root name server operators
asking that these zones be pulled from a new source, it would be done by the
next maintainance interval. The IANA is a special case -- while they have
delegated COM, ORG and NET to the current InterNIC contractor, IANA has the
right to redelegate them to someone else. So the fact is, *all* TLD's come
from the IANA. It's just that some of them come from the IETF (RFC1591 et al)
and some come from the UN (ISO 3166) and some will apparently be coming from
the IAHC (WEB, REC, et al).

The current InterNIC contractor did send me some hardware, it's true. But,
since you keep harping on it, I'm going to send it all back and use my own.
I consider buying a 1GB alpha to be inconvenient but it won't kill me.

The further truth is, NSI has asserted that it *OWNS* COM. And since it is
the one in charge of the root file, what odds would you care to lay on it
ever making an edit (so long as it continues to assert that it owns COM)
that removes COM from its control?

Odds: 1 in 1. There is no contest here.

Finally, where do you get the idea that you can tell someone else what to do
with their money, when that "someone else" is a private corporation?

My directions to the industry aren't about money. It turns out that everyone
who has followed my directions over the years has made more money because of
that -- but it's measured in dollars per decade rather than dollars per month.
I'm not particularly concerned about my directions' reputation for quality.

You know, all this talk about the Internet and DNS zones and who owns them
has lead me to believe that really, the US government should stay the hell
out of it.

The US government originally "owned" what used to be ARPAnet... the days
of ARPAnet are long gone and I don't see what right the US government has
to meddle in any of this. Yes, the NSF funded at one point a lot of
things, but that doesn't mean that they somehow have the right to take it
back. Heck, the NSF funds a lot of things, but it doesn't mean they own
it. Just because the government funds say the FDIC, doesn't mean they own
all banks, the same is true with InterNIC.

How many people out there really want a government regulated Internet?
First it's root zones, then it's dark fiber, pretty soon its the bits and
bytes flowing through routers and before you know it, Uncle Sam says you
can't swear while on IRC because a minor may be listening.

What I'm trying to convey here is that the US government doesn't own the
Internet any longer, nor does any other goverment on this planet. The
people run it. Now, I agree that if InterNIC was doing a bad job, they
should be replaced... but they aren't. Sure, they have their rough weeks,
and sometimes it is hard to get ahold of them.

Now, 15 years ago, the IANA might have been in the position to delgate
such power, but today... the Internet is radically different, and the
contract between InterNIC & IANA should be void because the IANA doesn't
*OWN* DNS any more. The US government doesn't *OWN* the Internet therefore
control over the root zone shouldn't be relinquished to them.

So what should happen? We all agree that COM zone is so full that its hard
to manage all the disputes over domains and what not. Personally, I
believe that InterNIC should still do all registrations and handle all
aspects of updating and maintaining databases, but I believe that InterNIC
should be regulated by some sort of committee to oversee changes in
policy. This committee would be elected or appointed, whatever is in the
best interest of the people.

I guess my idea differs from most as it doesn't involve much change. The
committee would be in power to change what TLDs there were, but not to
actually implement them. InterNIC would be the people who implement these
new policies, and take care of maintaining them.

This sounds like the perfect plan to me. Everyone is happy. InterNIC still
has it's business in tact, and the people have their method of deciding
what new TLD's, etc should go into effect.

Ah well, just an idea.


How many people out there really want a government regulated Internet?

As opposed to a Karl or Jim regulated internet? I guess I'll take the
government based on track record alone.