Re: [ga] Names Policy Development Process

[Rick Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

Todd,

you should propose thins in the IETF discussing these proposasl here does
no good because all the work to define URIs or URLs is done in the IETF.

-rick

On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, todd glassey wrote:

> My feeling is that a Root Zone Protocol as a top layer of a DNS resolution
> model might be also functional. The idea would be that if there was a Root
> Zone specified in the URI/URL then it would be used otherwise the default
> set would be (i.e. the ICANN set).
>
> The real win as I have said would be properly outfitted search engines since
> these are really the next generation resolution services anyway.
>
> Todd Glassey
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Palmer" <jp@ADNS.NET>
> To: "Ga" <ga@dnso.org>
> Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 10:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] Names Policy Development Process
>
>
> > >
> > > > Todd and all assembly members,
> > > >
> > > > todd glassey wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I still think that ICANN's biggest political and technical hurdle to
> > > leap is
> > > > > really what to do about other ROOT's.This may seem like a simple
> > > business
> > > > > question but it has far reaching ramifications that stretch
> throughout
> > > the
> > > > > entirety of what we know as the Internet.
> > > >
> > > >   ICANN and the other root structures have two choices really.
> > > > They can either work together and co-exist and still compete, or
> > > > they can be totally diverse.
> > >
> > > OK but on who's address space, and how could one bridge lookups between
> the
> > > two DNS Roots?. My take is that DNS and BIND fail this clearly but that
> the
> > > Search Engines may hold some hope if they can get their bad links cut to
> a
> > > minimum and provides regularly pruned lookup services.
> > >
> >
> > We were working something called MULTI-BIND, a version of BIND that
> > would allow a server operator to do just that. It would even allow the
> selection
> > of a particular version of a TLD over another one. This way, a server
> operator
> > could still use the USG root by default and then add in the non-colliding
> contents
> > of another root server network, or just specific TLDs by specifying name
> servers
> > for them.
> >
> > Alas, we got sidetracked onto other projects. Point is, its possible and
> another way
> > around ICANN.
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

--
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