ICANN Draws Fire Over Proposed Charges
patrick at cybernothing.org
Mon Jul 5 18:53:13 UTC 1999
On Mon, 5 Jul 1999 bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> > That is not entirely true.
> I'd be interested in your thoughts on why you think
> that there will be a change in the root server
> operators or placement of servers. As an operator
> I've been paying attention to this and think I understand
> whats going on.
Certainly. First, operation of the "A" root server is going to be turned
over at the direction of the Department of Commerce. Second, at present
one or more root server operators is refusing to sign a contract with
ICANN. Third, it is my understanding that the current "l.root-server.net"
server is(was?) being designated as the new authoratative "A"
> > I didn't see the reporter injecting commentary in the article, instead
> > sticking to objective facts and quotations, so I am curious as to why you
> > believe they have a "serious misunderstanding" of the issues.
> mixing a proposed domain registration fee and coordination of
> root servers seem to be orthaginal issues. While the
> "objective facts and quotations" may be accurate, they
> may not have any relevence to each other. Looks a lot
> like a hash to me...
Umm, he who controls the root servers, controls domain names. I'd say
they're pretty related issues.
Patrick Greenwell Telocity http://www.telocity.com
(408) 863-6617 v (tinc) (408) 777-1451 f
"This is our time. It will not come again."
More information about the NANOG