DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>


As part the RIR package found at

Does anyone else read (b) as a set up to disqualify RIRs who would do
business with an ISP that would do business with the now existing .BIZ.
How does one "avoid global address space fragmentation"?  So far ICANN
BoD seems to think it is OK to assign a new gTLD which duplicates one
that already exists, so they either have to get rid of one or make sure
the ISPs do not do business with one and they can only directly do this
through the RIRs.

Now, if I read Milton Mueller's most recent post correctly.

" Alternate roots do in fact exist. No one can prevent
them from existing, because te selection of a root
server to point to is a voluntary act by ISPs and
end-user client software. "

So my conclusion is that the only way for ICANN to move ahead in the
.biz manner they have chosen is to develop an agreement that restricts
the aforsaid voluntary act by the ISPs.

(9) Regional IP Address Registries

              The initial signatories to this MOU shall include ICANN
and the Signing RIRs who have signed below. ICANN will
              develop requirements and policies for the approval of
additional RIRs. This MOU assumes that these
              requirements will include at least:

                   (a) That the proposed RIR has demonstrated the broad
support of the Internet service providers
                   (ISPs) in its proposed region of coverage.

                   (b) That the region of coverage meets the scale to be
defined by ICANN considering the need to
                   avoid global address space fragmentation.

Then again I may be paranoid and wrong ;>}
Hum I just wonder if Verisign would benefit from such restrictions also.


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

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>