RE: [ga] DNSO ICANN board member

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 07:50 AM 9/4/00 +0200, Alf Hansen wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Simon
> > Higgs
> > Sent: 4. september 2000 00:22
> > To: roberto.gaetano@voila.fr
> > Cc: rmeyer@mhsc.com; dhc2@dcrocker.net; love@cptech.org; ga@dnso.org
> > Subject: RE: [ga] DNSO ICANN board member
>...
> > >And this I don't like.
> >
> > I agree. But certain facts of life are here to stay:
> >
> > 1. Alt.roots have been created as a direct result of:
>...
>Alt.roots should not be created unless they follow the specs defined by the
>IETF and the IAB.

There are no valid specs. That's the point. RFC2826 is implausible 
deniability for the existence of alt.roots. The IAB think that if they 
convince everyone that alt.roots don't exist, then the problems that 
created them will go away. Wrong answer.

The internet draft I'm working on is to set the guidelines of what is 
rational and acceptable to the community. The purpose is to set a boundary 
to prevent a major root fracture when ICANN runs out of steam (or money).

>If Alt. roots have been created for other reasons, f.ex.
>because some people disagree to certain aspects of ICANN/IANA, the Alt.
>roots should be abandoned.

Begging your pardon, but responses such as yours and RFC2826 are not 
acceptable. They do not address the problems that caused the alt.roots to 
be created in the first place. They certainly don't prevent alt.roots from 
being created. They do, unfortunately, show how completely out-of-touch the 
authors are with the internet community @Large.


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