RE: [ga-roots] Community Roots or Red Herrings)

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> From: Dassa [mailto:dassa@dhs.org]
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 11:39 PM
> 
> |> -----Original Message-----
> |> From: NameCritic [mailto:watch-dog@inreach.com]
> |> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 3:08 PM
> |>
> |> You said "Any roots aside from the legacy root under the control of
> ICANN
> |> are rogue and not legitimate on the Internet.  They are 
> private name
> spaces
> |> and belong on private networks, not in the public network and name
> space."
> |>
> |> According to who? What authority says this? Why are they 
> the authority?
...
> If we encourage fracturing then it will 
> not be just the
> Internet but a collection of alternative networks.  The 
> Internet is based
> around a single unique root zone. 

Not actually true, Root-zone, plus TLD zones, plus 3ld zones, plus ... plus
hosts.txt files (Yes, I use those as well, as backup for when DNS has a
hissy-fit).

> Encouraging rogue root 
> zones is IMHO not
> the best way to tackle the perceived shortage of TLD's.

You know Dassa, you are the last one I would expect to be using purposly
inflammatory language. The term I am refering to is "rogue". It implies that
someone is doing something illegal. Show me one law, anywhere, that makes
running a root-zone illegal.

If we are going to be constructive on this list, we need to stick to facts
and stay away from inflammatory characterizations. If you want to reference
actual breaches of law, then cite the actual laws that are violated.

BTW, there is at least one scenario where one HAS to run their own root zone
servers, for sound technical reasons. Many ISPs hit this scenario and run a
clone of the DOC root zone. Are they rogue? I think not.
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html