Re: [wg-c] voting on TLDs

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

> >I have yet to see any technical or policy basis to have any belief
> >whatsoever that additional TLDs, even thousands of them, will have any
> >impact on the "stability of the Internet".

> You might not like the analyses or concerns that have been raised, but they 
> have been raised repeatedly.  You have seen them and you have responded to 
> them.

There have been *NO* - read it again - *NO* technical indications that
several thousand to several hundred thousand new TLDs will have any
technical impact on the DNS.

There is nothing to read, nothing to respond to.

I might note that I've been associated with an actual test in which we
established a root with several million TLDs.  The world did not end, the
seas did not boil, the sun still rose in the east, and DNS still worked.


> Administrative instability is just as bad -- actually much worse

If new TLD operators are flakes, then they won't get any business.  And if
they don't get any business they won't get any queries.  End of story.


> -- as crashing machines.

My, now DNS can crash machines?  I have to characterize that as
super FUD.

Two points:

  1) If if that happens, blame the poor implementors of DNS software,
     don't stop new TLDs.

  2) If crashes can be casued by erros at the TLD level then it can
     just as well happen from the same cause at deeper levels.

     And as we know, those deeper levels are often run by rank amateaurs.
     And know what?  DNS isn't crashing despite lots of horrible
     administrators out there at the SLD and deeper levels.

     (Indeed, back in the olden days of the early 1990's, folks at one
     company set up host names that pushed every DNS limit just to see
     what hosts and resolvers would have trouble.  Few did.  And there's
     been ten years of debugging since then.)

		--karl--