<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<br>
On 08.08.12 14:16, parminder wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:50224A93.7050205@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
In that case, you may agree that making MORE sure that the root
operators are MORE independent of US gov will make the system MORE
fail-safe or capture-resistant. In practical terms I mean what if
instead of the present distribution of root server operators, 9 in
the US and 3 in US friendly countries, we have these servers
distributed in a more geopolitically equitous manner - as I
suggested, for a start RIRs of Africa, LA and Asia Pacific get one
each, and perhaps one more in each of these continents at a
reputed public technical institute. What do you say?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I say, this is asking for trouble. <br>
I also say that you will be wrong in assuming my position is to let
"US" control things unilaterally. Also, please note I am painting a
rather "unlikely" (but very much possible) situation to better
illustrate my point.<br>
<br>
However, imagine, that in order to support the large population in
say, Russia and China, two of the root operators are forced to move
there (*). What prevents those two to declare "independence". Each
of them, or both combined instruct their respective RIR to assume
the IANA responsibilities.<br>
<br>
You may think, that common sense will not let this happen. But
especially in those two countries, this is pretty easy to do and is
done from time to time. Nothing you, me or anyone else arguing "this
is wrong" is going to stop it.<br>
<br>
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.<br>
<br>
(*) Most of the root server operators are independent entities. In a
nation-state, taking over their properly would be called
"nationalization". Nationalization is hard business in democratic
countries. I have no idea how to call forcing an Swedish company, to
transfer their business to some Chinese company -- in order to
please our concept of power balance. I also have no idea of how this
is handled in an international context. But this is certainly
another issue that everybody seems to ignore.<br>
<br>
Daniel<br>
</body>
</html>