Irony: ICANN's Discussion Draft About Unique A-Root and Why It Should Run Same
ICANN published its “Discussion Draft: A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS”. Its basic premise is (1) there should be only one A-Root; and (2) ICANN should operate that A-Root because it, unlike all alternative DNSes, operates for the public good, and is operated by the Internet community. Do the few people controlling ICANN really believe this?
I agree that there should be only one authoritative root. I have not seen a viable proposal for multiple A-roots, though I am open to suggestions.
However, I strongly disagree that ICANN operates the DNS for the public good, and I disagree even more that ICANN is run by the Internet community. To the contrary, ICANN is run by a few self-dealing individuals, and their actions are taken based on their personal beliefs - the ICANN policies are not based on any consensus.
The ICANN paper criticizes alternative roots as “substitut[ing] insular motives for the community-based processes” and having been created “to gain proprietary advantage” “with little regard for the public interest”. I believe the policies and goals of the Open Root Server Confederation and other alternative roots are much more reflective of the Internet community’s consensus, and of the public interest, than ICANN’s politically motivated policies and direction.
The ICANN paper is pure irony and hypocrisy. I hope the “discussion” it calls for comes to the same conclusion.