Single DNS Root (was Re: Statements against new.net?)

Wed Mar 14 20:13:23 UTC 2001

At 10:21 PM 3/13/01 -0500, you wrote:

>but I've been saying ever since this whole
>topic came up that the worst possible outcome was more than one root.
>Nothing that has happened in the interim has changed my mind about that.

Yes, but you haven't been part of the solution either. That makes you part 
of the problem. Shouting "oh my, how terrible" in All Caps doesn't help 
solve the situation or stop the problem from occurring again.

There is no technical need for more than one root. Every alt.root worth 
talking to will admit that. There are multiple roots because of the 
**multiple failures** to introduce competition to the NSI registry. Draft 
Postel was canned in favor of the gTLD-MOU which was canned in favor of the 
Green/White paper that founded ICANN - who has now disenfranchised almost 
everybody who was once willing to give it a chance (if not $50,000).

With the growth of alt.roots, you are seeing the Internet route around a 
single point of failure - specifically competition within the US Government 
root zone. The IAB's fabulously entitled "Unique DNS Root" is seen as major 
damage to the health of the Internet, and the Internet community is routing 
around it with alt.roots. Is there a pattern here? Yes. Can it be called a 
consensus? Yes.

The alt.roots are doing DNS coordination on their own without an ICANN 
expense account or a "big 4" accounting firm. The two roots which are doing 
the least coordination are the ones that have tried to take ICANN/IANA 
head-on and lost (PGP Media/Name.Space and .TV/IdeaLab/New.net). Is there a 
pattern here? Yes. Can it be called a consensus? Yes.

What I'm getting at here is that the alt.root community would probably 
rather go away and become registries under RFC1591 (even Postel admitted to 
me RFC1591 isn't just for the ccTLDs) than have to endure a minority share 
of Internet users. Because the access to the US Government root is 
completely tied up by Verisign and ICANN playing kissy-kissy (I won't go 
into the current agreement farce), the Internet community is voting away 
from the US Government root on a daily basis. The longer the ICANN/DoC 
doors are closed to the "Unique DNS Root", the more alt.roots will spring 
up. And the more that spring up, the more of the Internet will support 
them. Is there a pattern here? Yes. Can it be called a consensus? Yes.

The solution is simple. Open up the US Government root to all parties on an 
equitable basis (RFC1591). Or accept the consequences of a fractured root. 
All I'm trying to do is some damage control until either one happens. I 
told the IAHC back in 1996 this would happen and it's happened.

Could multiple roots have been avoided? Damn right they could have. Crying 
over it now doesn't solve the problem or make them "magically" go away. Are 
you going to stick your head back in the sand and say "oh, how terrible" 
over and over, or are you going to help the alt.root community come to a 
unified single-root consensus?

Best Regards,

Simon

--
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, and
then you win. And once you have won, they join you." - Mahatma Gandhi