Re: [ga] FYI: Staff Draft towards Mission Statement

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Jefsey and all assembly members,

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> On 10:41 09/03/02, Jeff Williams said:
> >However Kents new position with ICANN may not
> >influence his positions.  But I haven't seen any thing he
> >has stated recently that would indicate such...
>
> Kent is involved with security isn't it?

  He has been on a low level in the past with PKI technology.  However
in his new position with ICANN I am not sure what his specific duties
are now, or will be.  Steve Crocker was hired by ICANN just after
Kent (Announced by ICANN and posted to this list) for the
security related considerations that ICANN needs to get moving
forward on as I understand it...

> I suppose that he is sharing into
> Lynn's brutal change concerning the root server system, its take over by
> the ICANN and the ICANN take over by the USG undr the "plural alibi" to
> call on Gov(s).

  Yes, this seems to be at least part of the plan as I understand it...

>
>
> Would some US citizen object to a root server system coneived as an US Fort
> to protect from the terrorists from the outer world?

  The answer to this would vary from group to group and Corp. to Corp.
I believe.  But overall, or in general the security of the Root servers
is and should be a high priority all be it one that ICANN has dragged
it's feet on for about 2 yrs now...

> This is not really an
> Alamo syndrom. It is a serious strategi matter. And for Kent it would be
> great to build/share in/rule such a kingdom.

  Yes it would.

>
>
> Frankly, I would certainly support that and I think Kent has the experience
> asn skills for that. If not the community support.

  Community support yes.  I have serious reservations from Kent's own
historical comments regarding PKI alone regarding security matters.

> Bringing back all the
> USG root servers on US soil; under DNSSEC and close protection/scrutiny of
> the CIA; on distributed locations. This is exactly what New.net is
> advocating. I am for it, with a big IF:

  First, I don't believe that anyone has come out publicly and stated
that all the Root Servers should be on US soil...

>
>
> IF:
> - other geographical areas develop *parallel/synchronous* root server systems
> - the private systems servicing registrants consortium TLDs (cf. RFC 920)
> like New.net or global roots like Pacific, ORSC, etc. may share into the
> used root file so it is a really global root file.

  RFC 920 has been obsolete for some time now.  It is especially not
usable as a guide after 9/11.

  What you are advocating here it seem to me is a shared root structure.
If so, we have been advocating that for about 5 years now.  We have
done tests and partial implementations on a number of occasions going
back to 1995.  I passed the test raw data to John Postal and the IANA
in 1996.

>
>
> The ICANN could then resume its IANA service, registering the TLDs as per
> the RFC 920 conflict resolution procedures. I would only propose to enhance
> them with the industry proposed RT/BP anti-TLD squatting criteria and
> probably some others from future experience.
>
> This is the way situation will necessarily evolve because it is the way it
> started and stayed stable for a while. So why to delay it. If Kent wants to
> be the US Master and stops the ICANN from wanting to be the world's master,
> we would all agree.

  Clever statement here Jefsey.  But even I don't believe that this is what
Kent wants nor will ICANN pursue...

>
>
> But is that what Kent wants?

  Again, no I don't believe so...  Perhaps he will answer that one directly
himself.

>
> Jefsey
>
> --
> 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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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