Re: [dnsext] draft-diao-aip-dns

Those of us who have been watching the moves by Russia and China for
some time, in particular their proposals into the Dubai ITU meeting
have been expecting something of the sort for some time.

The draft in question is simply describing a capability that the
Chinese have had deployed for at least five years, albeit maybe in a
different technical form.

People have been proposing splitting from ICANN since before there was
an ICANN. And when the CEO is being paid close to a million dollars a
year and the whole operation is being driven by rent seeking, I think
many of the people behind those proposals might be seen as prescient,
if not for the fact that many of them were looking to achieve a bit of
rent seeking of their own.

CABForum is currently looking at the bad things that could happen if
.corp is allowed. It turns out that a large number of corporations
already use this internally. Now leaving aside the technical
considerations, I do not think that CABForum should have to pay
$17,000 to make a formal objection on security grounds.

Of course Russia and China are going to find plenty of other countries
to support their position when the status quo is indefensible. Their
other tactic for attracting support is to promise countries that the
ITU is going to do something about reclaiming the international
telephone calling fees that have been lost as the public telephone
system has been effectively disintermediated.

At this point a split in the DNS root is more than inevitable, it has
already taken place. I would prefer to know how the split is
implemented from a technical point of view rather than have to try to
work it out.

People can fuss over whether this is a good or a bad thing, but the
countries that are looking to censor their net to avoid criticism of
their regimes are going to be doing that with or without approval
here.

The IETF can approve the draft and have the state control faction
claim that they have IETF endorsement of their scheme or if it is
rejected they will use the rejection as 'proof' of the 'need' to
develop standards in ITU instead.

This is not an unprecedented fight either. There were/are similar
fights over MAC address assignments and over barcodes and currently
there are similar fights over RFID. The barcode system we use today
was created by the Europeans super-setting the US scheme after they
found the US organization's terms ridiculous and unacceptable.

I think that eventually we will have a flat DNS where everyone is able
to register in the root zone at the same cost as present .com domains
or at the most the cost of an EV cert and with the same level of
reliability, service etc. The whole concept of hierarchical
partitioning of the namespace was bogus from the start. RealNames had
the right concept but the wrong business model. For any scheme like
that to be viable, there has to be an open registration model.

Open up the root zone completely and many of the problems created by
domain name squatting either go away or are drastically reduced in
scope. Eventually the public delegation points outside the root would
wither away. companies will not need to get worked up about crooks
registering their name in every random TLD that is given a taxi badge
by ICANN.

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext