Association of Trustworthy Roots?

Sun Jan 16 21:52:12 UTC 2005

See http://www.public-root.com for an alternative to the ICANN monopoly.
Those folks are very concerned with security.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <gnulinux at pacinfo.com>
To: <nanog at merit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 3:45 PM
Subject: Re: Association of Trustworthy Roots?

> 
> On 16 Jan 2005 at 21:31, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
> 
> > wsimpson at greendragon.com (William Allen Simpson) wrote:
> > 
> > > While the Association of Trustworthy ISPs idea has some merit, we've
> > > not been too successful in self-organizing lately.  ISP/C?
> > 
> > I thought we already had built such a thing, currently covered by ICANN.
> 
> let's think outside the box.
> 
> there's no reason that nanog (or anyone willing to run 
> a mailing list) couldn't create an ad hoc 
> decentralized Trustworthy ISP/Root service.  heck, 
> such a thing may even encourage more active 
> participation in nanog.  having a shared group 
> identity where the rubber meets the road is very 
> powerful.  it's the underlying motivator behind the 
> nanog, xBSD, GPL, torrent, tor, (pick your non-
> hierarchical community driven project), etc. clans.
> 
> there's also no reason that this has to replace ICANN. 
>  and it would likely have the exact result on existing 
> entities that you mention below - improved 
> trustworthiness.
> 
> 
> peace
> 
> 
> > But well...life changes everything, and for some (or many) or us, this
> > association doesn't seem so trustworthy anymore. Maybe it would be better
> > to improve trustworthiness of the existing authorities. I believe there
> > is still much room for participation, not to mention political issues
> > you simply cannot counter on a technical level.
> > 
> > 
> > > At the moment, I'm concerned whether we have trustworthy TLD operators.
> > 
> > One can never know what's going on behind the scenes. Maybe Verysign
> > is on the issue, maybe not. I believe, there are at least three VS
> > people on this list who could address this. I don't know whether they
> > are allowed to.
> > 
> > 
> > > It's been about 24 hours, it is well-known that the domain has been
> > > hijacked, we've heard directly from the domain owner and operator,
> > > but the TLD servers are still pointing to the hijacker.
> > 
> > By chance - how is the press coverage of this incident? Has anybody
> > read anything in the (online) papers? Unfortunately I haven't been
> > able to follow the newsboards intensely this week-end, but Germany
> > seems very quiet about this.
> > 
> > Yours,
> > Elmar.
> 
> 
> 
> 