[governance] Vixie supports another root administration (fwd)

[Paul Vixie]

# >i'm cc'ing mr. mueller in hopes that he will forward it to the 
# >list on my behalf
# 
# Done. My reply to your post below.

thanks.  i've since subscribed to governance@, so this one should just work.

# #Then you will have a split root.
# 
# >then you will have a root nameserver system that's publishing 
# >stale IANA data rather than up-to-date IANA data.  
# 
# I understand this distinction quite well, too.  And you are wrong that
# the result is not two distinct name spaces.  If up-to-date USG-controlled
# IANA data differs from "stale" IANA data, you have a split root.  Period.
# You know this as well as I.

if i'm wrong, then how is it that i know it as well as you?  please don't
put words in my mouth.  the ORSN web site is pretty clear on what their
possible motives are.  their goal is to stay synchronized, and they think
that any deliberate staleness would be a short term measure.  if i thought
it was a "split root" i wouldn't be helping them.  i think i'm a better
expert on what the root is and what my motives are than just about anybody,
so don't tell me what i know.

# You would be much more convincing

i'm not trying to convince anybody of anything.  i'm explaining my motives.

# if you would point out that the existence of this independently-maintained
# root reduces the chance that the USG would abuse its oversight over the root
# zone file to begin with.  It would basically be a game of chicken in which
# the threat of a viable alternate root system capacble of creating a DNS
# incompatibility obviously not in everyone's interests would make USG think
# twice about doing it.

if that's what you think ORSN is doing, then we have a difference of opinion.
and since i've talked extensively to ORSN, i feel like your opinion on this
could be some kind of self-justificatory weed-seeking.

# And that's why I support what you and ORSN are doing. So, relax.

i'm relaxed.  but not because i have your support.  for one thing, the thing
you claim to be supporting is different than the thing i know i'm doing.

# ... I would suggest that you spend less time on the West coast and more time
# in neocon circles in Washington.  And think less of about "Prepcom3 results"
# and more about the Family Research Council and .xxx.

thanks for this advice, but i've got another way of deciding what to worry
about.

# >i'm not siding with them.
# 
# Your own article said you were "participating" in the Project. 

i operate a server for their content, yes.

# You have publicly associated with them, adding considerably to their
# visilbity and credibility.  You use the words "helping" and "supporting"
# them.

they're good folks.  when someone asked about this on nanog@, i spake thusly:

	internet governance ain't what it will be.  anyone who wants to keep
	name universality in place as the system evolves, can ask or expect
	help from me.

# You could easily have ignored them, but did not.

i could have?  i don't see how.

# If you want to say you are not "siding" with them, it's fine with me, but I
# suspect this distinction won't matter to anyone but you.

i don't know how many ways to say "their motives don't matter to me" or even
that "i don't agree with their fears" or how about "if they ever amend the
zone i'm outta here" so i'll stop.  i suspect that anyone who wants to know
the truth will search for it, and those who want to support their
preconceptions will do that, and nothing further i can say will matter much.

# Let's not waste any more time on semantic debates of that sort, ok?

see above.

# And hey, I think what you are doing makes a lot of sense.

if only what you thought made sense was anything like what i'm doing, then it
could conceivably matter to me how you feel about it.  maybe.

# So relax.

i'm relaxed already.  but thanks for this advice.

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance