RE: [ga] DNSO ICANN board member

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 09:50 AM 9/3/00 -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:

>> >We all saw what John Postel and Paul Vixie (at John Gilmore's prompting)
>> >did a couple of years ago in splitting the root servers up into US
>> >Gov-controlled and non-USG-controlled groups by changing the
>> >non-USG-controlled root servers to pull their root zone from an IANA
>>server instead of a.root. What they actually did was attempt to create an
>>alt.root out of the non-USG-controlled root servers. Had no-one noticed the
>>change of root authority then the 7 CORE TLDs would have been added to half
>
>I don't know how Simon came by these bits of fantasy, but they are 
>factually wrong in every respect.

Since you are well know to the internet community as a purveyor of 
disinformation, I'll take that under advisement. The press published 
another opinion:

"Postel had asked NSI for permission to conduct the test last month. 
However, NSI had said that in accordance with its government contract it 
had to get official clearance. But Postel went ahead even without that 
clearance."
[..]
"For some in the 'Net community, Postel's actions brought to mind Eugene 
Kashpureff, who is facing federal charges of computer and wire fraud for 
last year hijacking NSI's InterNIC Web site where users register their 
domain names."
http://www.nwfusion.com/news/0204postel.html

Note the reasons cited to justify the experiment were because Postel wasn't 
happy with the US proposal. The "experiment" resulted in separate root 
authorities for USG-controlled and IANA-controlled root servers. That is a 
fragmentation of the root.

>John was testing the ability to switch to a new root server.  At the time, 
>there was some concern that NSI might turn rogue and he was exploring the 
>ability to remedy the problems that would cause.  In addition, the idea 
>for a "stealth master", that is finally being deployed now, was developed 
>back then.

The stealth server was old news even then. Jon and I had discussed the 
possibilities at least two years before the event.

See my message to Roberto for the rest. The rest of your reply wasn't even 
rational enough to comment on. The timing for this was IMMEDIATELY after 
the gTLD-MoU was defeated by overwhelming common sense:
http://www.nwfusion.com/news/0123dns.html



Best Regards,

Simon Higgs

--
It's a feature not a bug...

--
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