[governance] RE: GeoTLD

[Karl Auerbach]

Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>> If we accept the proposition that there can be multiple root systems,
>> each with its suite of TLD offerings, then the choice becomes one made
>> by the users of the internet rather than by some singular overlord of
>> names.
> 
> Big "if" there, unfortunately. And one that doesn't really exist with wide
> acceptance except in a few alternative views of reality.

The fact that relatively few competing root systems exist today is not, 
at least not to me, a very strong argument, much less a persuasive or 
compelling argument.

Once upon a time - back in the 1970's - the telcos incessantly whined 
that the only way to do data networking was through the use of switched 
circuits, and their "big new thing", ISDN, and that those of us at UCLA, 
Lincoln Labs, Rand, and SDC ought to forget this new "alternative view 
of reality" called packet switching.

The number of people who used that "alternative view" easily could, and 
sometimes did, fit into a single university classroom.

Yet in the fullness of time that "alternative view of reality" became 
today's internet.

At one time it seemed like an insane idea to intentionally infect people 
with a mild disease (cowpox) as a means to prevent a much worse disease 
(smallpox).  Yet today, largely based on what was once considered an 
insane idea, the world is nearly (and perhaps really) relieved of what 
was once a terrible thing.

So the argument that a thing which lacks popularity today will 
necessarily forever be relegated to only the outer regions and near 
oblivion is hardly an argument that rings in harmony with our experiences.

Sure, most of the competing root systems that have existed have been 
operated with an embarrassingly low level of skill.  But there are also 
other competing roots - ORSN for example - that operate with a high 
degree of skill.

The argument of the IETF and IAB is almost entirely one based solely on 
their position as authority rather than sound, testable technical 
arguments.  This brings to mind the wisdom of Thomas Aquinas 
(1225–1274): Locus ab auctoritate .. est infirmissimus.  (The argument 
from authority is the weakest form of argument.)

Competing roots can and do work - the issue is not that there be a 
singular root, the issue is, rather, that of consistency.

Competing roots do offer a way out of the present mess regarding DNS. 
And moreover, there is no way to prevent them from being deployed or used.

And perhaps most importantly, once they are deployed and if they obtain 
acceptance, then the entire structure of ICANN - most particularly its 
pyramid of contracts - comes crumbling to the ground because its 
foundational premise fails - that of a singular root that can be 
controlled by one entity.

So, if we evaluate upside versus downside - we have little to lose  by 
dropping the institutional and automatic rejection of competing roots: 
  If they are as bad as some say they will quickly fail with little harm 
to the internet community.  But if they succeed, we all win in a big way 
because we solve a Gordian knot of internet governance.

		--karl--

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance