Re: [ga-roots] ICANN Discussion Draft posted May 28

["L Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

I've seen some blatant misrepresentations, but this is really out there.  It takes the 
truth and twists it all out of whack.

Terms like "in the public interest" are an oxymoron coming from ICANN, since 
there is anything but the public interest at the heart of their intentions.  There is lip 
service paid to public input, but no substance.  The public is simply told what it 
will need, want or prefer.

To refer to interests in financial gain as wrong for operators of alt.TDS when that is 
precisely the goal of NSI and the other regsitres coming on board with ICANN is, 
well, simply outrageous.  

The technical issues are the same ones we have been discussing with regard to 
ICANN's introduction of a colliding TLD.  Until recently, ICANN disavowed (as late 
as Melbourne) technical problems and stated that there are separate name 
spaces and that ICANN did not have to recognize the others.  Suddenly they 
agree there is a global name space.  They now turn that around to say that they 
ARE the global name space which is just as ridiculous since any computer in the 
world can set up a root in the public name space.  Is ICANN now going to say 
they will control the world from MDR, USA?

The reference to RFC 2826 (request for comment, not law, btw) refers to a unified 
rootzone, but does not in any way preclude multiple root systems.  We ALL agree 
that there must be a unified "virtual rootzone," which simply means no 
duplications.  ICANN continues to promote the erroneous idea that there can be 
only one root server system in order to not break the DNS.  It has been proven for 
years that multiple root systems exist with no problems unless there are TLD 
collisions.  ICANN now introduces a major collision and states it is the other guy's 
fault.  

Oh, the disinformation that comes from ICANN is both entertaining and dangerous. 
 As long as ICANN keeps its head firmly planted in the sand, there will be no end 
to problems.  Where is the cooperation that was to occur when the IANA functions 
were taken over by newco?  It became vaporized.  

So, where do we go from here?  This draft says ICANN has drawn a line in the 
sand and still refuses to acknowledge reality.


On 29 May 2001, at 2:20, Joanna Lane wrote:

> http://www.icann.org/stockholm/unique-root-draft.htm
> 
> Discussion Draft: A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS
> 
> 
> Abstract
> 
> 
> 
> This document reaffirms ICANN's commitment to a single, authoritative
> public root for the Internet Domain Name System (DNS) and to the management
> of that unique root in the public interest according to policies developed
> through community processes. This commitment is founded on the technical
> and other advice of the community and is embodied in existing ICANN policy.
> 
> ________________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Joanna
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html