| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Long-awaited DNS Report from National Academy of Sciences Released
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 16 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Everyone knows that the legacy root servers could
handle millions of TLDs. The insiders lied about
that. When challenged, they changed their lies
and pointed to the "limits of the ICANN legal
staff" to negotiate and draft contracts.
TLDs are no longer interesting. ICANN has helped
to destroy any demand. Consumers polled in
market research surveys desire a .COM name no
matter how ugly it is. They could not even find
a .INFO name when asked over and over to type
the name into a browser. They kept adding .COM.
.ORG makes no sense to them and they rarely
see a need for .NET which they assume is their
ISP.
In the mid-90s, if thousands of TLDs had been
allowed by the IANA dictator Jon Postel, the
world would now be a better place. Instead,
you now get to attempt to work around the mess
that Postel left behind in Joe Sim's hands.
.COM is pretty much it. The world starts over.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
There is one change the Root Servers should
make, but of course they will not make.
Anyone who really understands **security** can
show you why 13 golden root server addresses
coming from known insiders are a really bad
idea.
The 13 addresses would be **more secure** if
they were GENERIC. That removes any notion of
who is behind them. ISPs would then route them
on a secure root server network or handle them
locally. People do not need to know that root
server N is located in some geek's basement in
Palo Alto. That may be an ego trip for that
geek, but it does not increase security and
stability.
The same can be said for TLD servers. It is more
secure to place them on Generic Addresses. The
fact that ICANN does not even discuss such topics
shows how naive and inexperienced they are in
real telecommunications operations. They are
mostly recycled academics who could not teach
or do, and now govern.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
That is a nice study, but it is too late and
provides no path forward.
The marketplace is moving forward. .NET is the
last of the Postel legacy. All of the insiders
now have a big piece of the Postel pie. They
can retire and travel to ICANN meetings for
the rest of their lives. Most people would be
bored to tears and not interested in that crowd
of self-promoting liars.
Free domain names appear to be what people desire.
It is interesting that with all of the ICANN
non-profit mantras and community-this and
community-that, they never focused on anything
free. The lawyers watched their source of fees
carefully. Funding allows them to play another
round. They will wear people down until they
have all of the marbles. Smart people walk away.
The marketplace is moving forward. Volume
solutions in millions of people's homes and
small offices will route around ICANN and .NET.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
I thought that this committee had quietly ceased.
I can't find a link to the actual report via the URL provided in the main ICANNWatch item on this thread.
Here's a pointer to what I submitted:
http://www.cavebear.com/rw/nrc_presentation_july_1 1_2001.ppt [cavebear.com]
Ten new TLDs is still a significant artifical scarcity - it means in 100 years that we will have a mere 1300 TLDs. And that's in a system that we know can readily hold a thousand times more.
They are proposing essentially one TLD new TLD per month - with time off for two months of holidays. But in reality it takes only a few seconds to add a new TLD to a root zone file - faster if one bothers to create a bit of automation. I can hardly see a need for the rest of the time the committee thinks is needed to add a new TLD.
It sounds like the forces of Internet Ossification and stabilty-over-innovation wrapped in words of Uncontradictable Techno-ese have come to roost on the Internet as heavily as it came to roost on the telephone industry of the 1950's.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
