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

Don't call devil. Despite all obsolete contributions - Russian representatives never proposed to split dns root.

Sent from my iPhone

On 29.06.2012, at 16:31, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext