Re: [ga] Re: Names Council Resolution on Reform

[Sandy Harris <sandy@storm.ca>]

todd glassey wrote:

8 cc's deleted.
 
> If the Chinese are half as smart as I usually give them credit for, what
> they will do is insist on two roots and an interoperability treaty.

Possibly.

> The point is that ICANN has no right to insist that there be only one root,

The protocols require that there be only one root:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2826.txt

Methinks ICANN quite obviously have no right to claim they are living
up to their obligations to manage that root in a "open and transparent"
manner. Karl's suit is the most blatant example.

I'd argue that they are failing on other criteria too. Eliminating
publicly elected directors from a "public interest" corporation,
amd generally operating more as a club for various special interests
than in the the public interest.

Overall, I'd question ICANN's right to suggest -- let alone insist --
that they have done a competent job to date, or that they should be
trusted to manage the root in future.

> or only one Internet. 

There is only one Internet.

> And what they (the Chinese Government) will probably tell
> the world is that China has an Information Control policy that is political
> rather than technical

You support this?

> and that it must operate its own root to satisfy this.

That does not follow.

> If it is really smart, China might also replicate the entirety of IPv4 space
> by simply implementing a set of Gateway NAT Bridges in and out of China.

That doesn't work, at least not with standard NAT. The could use all of
10.0.0.0/8 in China without problems, but not 0.0.0.0/0.
 
> Poof - with this type of technology you get instant independent namespace
> and IP address space as well. And its so simple to implement relative to the
> existing practices and technologies, that its almost laughable...

It looks purely imaginary to me. Can you point to docs on the NAT
variant
that you believe will make this work?
--
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