Re: [ga] I want to be on the Inclusivbe Name Space SIG ML

[PacificRoot Hostmaster <idno@tallship.net>]

On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Sandy Harris wrote:

> 
> That's a contradiction. By definition, the "inclusive" namespace includes
> ICANN's space plus others things, and ICANN cannot manage things outside
> the space it manages.

(Note: You mispelled "Inclusive Name Space")

Yes this is true. Vint Cerf admitted when he got grilled before congress
that their attorneys tell him that they are only responsible for their
root. "They" however, do need to co-exist cooperatively with their
neighbors including the Inclusive Roots firing up under the authority of
other soveriegn governments outside the bubble that Vint and his other
non-elected Board Members are living in. In the meantime, "Their" air is
running out in that bubble. 

> 
> Given the way DNS works, anyone can set up their own root with an "inclusive"
> name space. My root might, for example, point to .cat and .dog on my own
> servers, but point to ICANN-authorized servers for .com. .net, ...

And you might Point to The PacificRoot's authorized servers for .BIZ and
.NOMAD too ;) But authorized is not correct syntax in the sense that you
use it. What you meant to say was "AUTH" (even if you don't know that's
what you meant). One is DNS, and the other is just phraseology and
mumbo jumbo ICANN's crooked  politicians use to engage in psychological
warfare with the public through the media tool, who are just innocently
looking for a "scoop". 

ICANN can't "AUTHORIZE" - it can only recommend that the US government
illegally and unconstitutionally  load colliders. ICANN readily admits
that they have no authority to load colliders in:
http://www.icann.org/tlds/correspondence/esi-v-icann-13nov00.htm where it
is specifically stated that, "ICANN represents that it has no authority to
implement new TLDs, and that instead, it merely makes recommendations to
the Commerce Department..."

Also, http://www.PacificRoot.com/news/00121800.shtml  Which sites, "ICANN
has no inherent legal authority to make any final decisions on new TLDs.
That authority rests solely with the Department of Commerce..."

ad nauseam infinitum.... The list goes on forever....

> 
> This works fine provided there are no collisions. If either I try to use
> .org or ICANN decides to use .dog, chaos ensues unless one of us changes
> the name or scraps their root server entirely.

Chaos ensues, and tickets for the show are selling like hotcakes :)
 
> 
> Scrapping ICANN's root servers isn't worth discussing; too much depends on

You're not really understanding how this works. there are "root servers"
and there are servers answering auth for TLDs. We call them TLD Servers to
make it easy to understand. ICANN names their TLD Servers
"X.GTLD-SERVERS.NET" Where "X" is replaced with a hostname. They also run
TLDs on some root servers, but that is beside the point. They don't have
to - and shouldn't. It's bad form.

So what you meant to say (even though you didn't know it) was that they
would have to "Pull the collding zone files from their TLD Servers" their
root servers really aren't needed - The only thing root servers need to
point to are the nameservers answering "AUTH" for a zone - in this case
we're talking about a TLD string. Now, we're not advocating neccessarily
that the whole world upgrade their DNS ;) That's a choice each and every
commercial provider or subscriber needs to make on their own.

After all, The Internet is owned by companies like SPRINT and
Cable&Wireless and The PacificRoot and UUnet and SWBELL. We own the cable
and the fiber and and routers, and  in it's virtual entirety the Internet 
operates via private sector companies that agree to pass traffic from each
others networks using various odd protocols through agreements contractual
implied or otherwise. 

Heck, We charge the government for access and can whimsically decide not
to provide service to them at the expiration of their contracts with us.

Right to pass subject to revocation by owner.

If you'd stop and listen to yourself for just one moment Sandy, you would
see that you are buying into a fantasy. The Internet is a commercial
operation - not a government operation. It is we, the commercial providers
of service that dictate how we will run our networks and who we will allow
to traverse them.

Can you name even one Fortune 1000 company that doesn't have it's own
Private network? {well maybe you can but you get my point} And you think
that the government is going to tell them what they are going to carry on
their network? That's unconstitutional to say the least, possibly even
mercantilism. that's why we use firewalls, and block undesireable traffic
- at will, and on a daily basis.

> visible, but even then, you'd keep the servers.) So the only solutions to
> a collision are:
> 
> 	change the ICANN name
> 	change the other name
> 	scrap the other root server

You left one out one:  Load the illegal collider and watch the fun begin.

> 
> The "alternate root" people have tried to make a business out of building
> such inclusive roots and selling space in them.

I'm sure I don't know what you're talking about when you say "alternative
root". You must mean the deprecated ICANN legacy system. As far as
Inclusive Roots, it just makes sense to provide resolution for all that
there is out there. It's what the users (Subscribers, to be accurate)
want, and we're giving it to them.

It's what the ISPs want, and we're giving it to them.

It's what the Hosting providers want, and we're giving it to them.

The government doesn't have to buy our service if it doesn't want to. I
spent over 3 years with the Defense Department and I can tell you they
don't pay enough or timely enough for us to bother with them or their
contracts ;) We have plenty of customers in the commercial market and it's
only going to get better if ICANN succeeds in getting a colliding .BIZ
loaded :)

That is what you NEED to worry about Sandy. Truly.

> 
> Now there's a collision. .biz exists in one of the alternate roots, but
> ICANN just decided to create a .biz in its root.

No, there's no collider yet in the alternate root, but they're trying to
get the DoC to load one ;)

> 
> ( Methinks that was a bad decision. There's an obvious possible confusion
>   with .bz, so I don't think ICANN should allow .biz. )

Tom Guidry would agree with you on that too. But it didn't get him or his
company anywhere. In fact, His claim to .BZ seemed to be quite probably
valid, and he wanted The PacificRoot to run it. We declined though and the
government of Belize pulled out all the plugs on him and broke their
contract. I think they did the wise thing too, considering what I came to
think of the man after getting to know him, and after chatting with Randy
Bush about it.

But this country's (The United States) government isn't the government of
Belize, and we have a Constitution that protects us from scary monsters
like ICANN. And if our government lets us down, oh well, let the show
begin ;)

> 
> Assuming the folks running the non-ICANN .biz do not want to scrap their
> servers (which might scrap their business), the available alternatives
> are:
> 
> 	persuade ICANN to drop .biz (not likely)

you sure?

> 	change the non-ICANN TLD name (upsets customers)

Excuse me? now let's not get ridiculous here Sandy :)

> 	negotiate some sort of deal that gets their customers moved
> 	  into the new, authorized, .biz

Although I can't speak for ARNI, I believe that it is their position that
they (ICANN) can move their customers over to the new, authorized .BIZ
anytime they like as long as the following two conditions are met:

1.) The name must be available

2.) They have to pay for it just the same as anyone else.

(Note: The new, authorized .BIZ is over 5 years old)

> 
> I see ICANN dropping .biz as highly unlikely. It is a desirable name, they'd

I know that people nowadays tend to think in speculative terms, but to me
it's no more desireable than .qwerty or .com. And to be completely honest
with you, I don't even have registered a single .BIZ domain. I personally
like the very first domain we ever registered in The PacificRoot's POSSR
system - "SPUTNIK.NOMAD" ;) I thought it appropriate - if you know what I
mean :) 

> almost certainly be sued by the people they just gave it to, and backing down
> on the decision would make them look extremely foolish.

Yeah they really put their back into a corner didn't they?

> 
> Methinks the people running the non-ICANN .biz should be trying to arrange
> some sort of deal with the new ICANN .biz folks. 

Although we're really too busy to take any phone calls from Dr. Cerf or
Mike Roberts, They both already know all too well that they are welcome to
load any and/or all of the TLDs supported by The PacificRoot whenever they
wish, and without benefit of contract.

I hope I've cleared up some of your misunderstandings Sandy, and if time
permits I'll be happy to assist you further anyway I can in the future.

Kindest regards,


Bradley D. Thornton
Chief Technology Officer
The PacificRoot/Joint Technologies Ltd.
The ONLY root that resolves all roots!
Upgrade your DNS for free today at:
http://www.PacificRoot.com
http://www.JointTech.com

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html