[84878] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Turkey has switched Root-Servers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher L. Morrow)
Tue Sep 27 17:36:57 2005
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 21:36:29 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@mci.com>
In-reply-to: <4339A677.6000503@peter-dambier.de>
To: Peter Dambier <peter@peter-dambier.de>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Peter Dambier wrote:
>
> Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
> > I'm confused by the reasoning behind this public-root (alternate root)
> > problem... It seems to me (minus crazy-pills of course) that there is no
> > way for it to work, ever. So why keep trying to push it and break other
> > things along the way?
>
> Paul Vixie has given very good arguments.
paul often does, yes.
>
> Let me add a design fault:
> >
> The Public-Root has got 3043 domains. ICANNs root has got only 263.
>
> There is a political design problem with ICANNs root. It has not got
> enough toplevel domains.
'not enough'... how much is 'enough'? by your calculations or mine or
pauls or G.W. Bush's?
Is your problem that it takes X months/years to get a new TLD put into the
normal ICANN Root system? Or is it that you don't like their choice of
.com and want .common (or some other .com replacement?). There is a
process defined to handle adding new TLD's, I think it's even documented
in an RFC? (I'm a little behind in my NRIC reading about this actually,
sorry) Circumventing a process simply because it's not 'fast enough'
isn't really an answer (in my opinion atleast) especially when it
effectivly breaks the complete system.
>
> DNS was designed as a tree. It was designed decentralised.
>
> DNS today has degenerated to a flat file like /etc/hosts was.
>
uhm, how so? certainly the tree and decentralized functions still exist.
> It is no longer decentralised but stored mostly in a single registry.
>
huh? how so? Because 25M of the 35M 2nd level domains are in .com? isn't
that more a function of 'everyone knows www.company.com' than anything
else? I can't get people inside my company to realize (well, couldn't when
it mattered to me) remeber that my email address was chris@uu.NET ... they
always wanted to send to chris@uu.net.COM.
.COM got more registrations simply, it seems to me, via marketting.
> No wonder that some people try a Public-Root that is independent but
> compatible to ICANNs root. They do it since about 1995. They never
> stopped. The name changed. The players mostly did not. With every new
> version of this Public-Root compared to the Monopoly-Root, the number of
> players gets more. The number of customers gets more.
people love crack, it's still not a good idea to smoke it.
