Re: new DNS classes or anything else

[George Michaelson <[e-mail]>]

some people have said to me that "put it in the DNS" was funny until
DNSSEC was cooked, at which point it becomes the giant
single-point-of-failure we all depend on, to provide a single unitary
TA over attested things, testable.

it's possible the unitary namespace value is now more about "I can
prove <x>" than its about the simple unique label question.

-G

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:39 AM, John Levine <[e-mail]> wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>>Having enough of the world get aggravated enough at ICANN (or
>>some other entity of one's choice) to make general adoption of
>>an alternate root plausible is another matter and I don't think
>>we are there, at least yet.
>
> Here in the IETF we are so close to ICANN that we suffer from sample
> bias.  To the extent the outside world is even aware of ICANN, they
> see that .com, .org, .net, and the large ccTLDs all work, registering
> in them is straightforward and not too expensive, and everything else
> is noise.  One advantage of ICANN's turgid bureaucratic processes is
> that it makes it unlikely that they will do anything seriously
> destructive because it would be too hard.
>
> We all know how to run our own roots if that's what we want to do, but
> I continue to observe approximately none of us doing it.
>
> R's,
> John
>