Good Timing for .COM Problems ?

MFS michael at dook.org
Sun Jul 20 17:39:25 UTC 1997


On Sun, 20 Jul 1997, Jim Fleming wrote:

>
> People might want to look on the bright side
> of the recent failure by Network Solutions, Inc.
> to properly distribute the .COM zone information.
>
> This failure will likely make it clear that .COM, .NET
> and .ORG should be moved to a collection of private, NSI,
> TLD Name Servers and off of the legacy Root Name
> Servers operated by the U.S. Government and a few
> volunteers.

I beleive that 'volunteers' having the 'control' of the internet's domain
name space is in accordance with the *spirit* of the network.

Of course the network is 'run' by (usually) well paid individuals who
work for (sometimes) large corporations, BUT, standards, protocols and such
are created (via the IETF) by these (usually) well paid individuals who
work for the (sometimes) large corporations on a volunteer basis.

> The failure comes at a time when the NSF has made
> it clear that they are slipping out the back door of the
> "Registry Industry", at a time when Network Solutions,
> Inc. has recently relocated domain registration personnel
> to a new building, and at a time when Network Solutions, Inc.
> is raising more capital via an IPO and making it clear
> that they intend to continue registering .COM domains.
> <http://www.netsol.com>

Maybe I am sorely out of touch, but was NSI actually granted ownership of
com? This may sound like a flippant comment, but I am completely serious. I
may be out of touch here.

> The timing could not be better for this "failure". The
> solution is clearly for NSI to harden the .COM, .NET
> and .ORG TLD servers with their own infrastructure.
>
> The various Root Name Server Confederations around
> the world have little choice but to point .COM, .NET
> and .ORG references to the NSI servers (currently
> the legacy roots). Until other States besides Virginia
> or other countries set up their own .COM servers, this
> will be the case and NSI will have what some people
> view as a "monopoly".

I suppose that this central point of failure has it's positives, it
could be good if the com and net information is corrupted, NSI could reload
proper info on their servers and that would be that. BUT, NSI could corrupt
the data and NOT reload for several hours, rendering the root operators
helpless.

Michael Stevenson
michael at dook.org

> --
> Jim Fleming
> Unir Corporation
>
>
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list