Not the best solution, but it takes VeriSign out of the loop

Wed Sep 17 16:41:13 UTC 2003

I never said anything in my original posting regarding assistance from the
root operators; god knows you guys have a hard enough job already. And
frankly blocking non-cooperative servers would hurt the net just as much as
what VeriSign's doing.

My suggestion was to simply create a viable alternative source of com/net
zones that operators could use if they choose to do so. If you don't like
what VeriSign is doing with them, don't use VS zones anymore.

Hopefully, eventually, IANA will be telling you to switch the roots. Not me.
Not likely, but ORG managed to pull off a transition to other ownership.

For anyone who's interested, you can "opt-in" to the new zones I'm building
here: http://www.symetrix.net/gtld/

	-Mike

---
Michael Damm, MIS Department, Irwin Research & Development
V: 509.457.5080 x298 F: 509.577.0301 E: miked at irwinresearch.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Vixie [mailto:vixie at vix.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 9:27 PM
To: nanog at merit.edu
Subject: Re: Not the best solution, but it takes VeriSign out of the loop

> > Who's up for creating a network of new gTLD servers? 

> This would require cooperation from the root-servers operators.

speaking for f-root, we won't be cooperating with anything like that.
we do not edit the zone files we serve.  they come from iana, and if
you want something different served, you'll have to talk to iana.  i
cannot speak for the other rootops but i suspect that their answers
might be compatible with, if not downright similar to, f-root's.

> And a serious effort from ISP/NSP community to block network access to 
> root-servers that don't cooperate.
> 
> I agree that it's a good idea at this point.  I see nothing else as a 
> serious long-term technical solution. 

sounds like mob rule to me -- count me out.  so, block me first, i guess?
-- 
Paul Vixie