[governance] IGF and TLDs

[Eric Dierker]

So Karl,

Why are the big money players sticking with this ICANN myopia.  I do not see it as cost effective or advantageous that they should stay in the ICANN sandbox. Where is the disconnect between policy in direction of expenditures and the technical possibility/reality?



________________________________
From: Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
Sent: Tue, June 29, 2010 6:25:23 PM
Subject: Re: [governance] IGF and TLDs

On 06/29/2010 02:32 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> no one is stopping anyone from defining another naming system
> according to rfc3986 and the protocols that go along with it.  it is
> just that there is no uptake for it at the moment (or even research
> support as far as i can tell).

At a technical level, there is nothing stopping anyone from building anything - the end-to-end principle exists, at least in theory.

However, given the increasing number of internet walls, proxies, NATs, application-embedded rules, and application layer gateways, anything out of the ordinary may have a hard time getting its packets from hither to yon.

At a commercial level, however, ICANN has played "Chicken Little" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sky_Is_Falling_%28fable%29 ) and spread FUD ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt ) to discourage anyone from experimenting on anything in the realm of DNS that is not approved by ICANN, most particularly in the area of competing roots.

(I have heard, but I have not looked myself, that ICANN's contracts require TLD aspirants to promise to refrain from engaging in any business practice that could be construed as recognition of any root other than the ICANN/NTIA/Verisign root.  I'd like to know whether I'm hearing truth or false in this regard.)

Leaping back to technology - There are already people practicing variations on DNS - Is it Ultranet that is offering filtered DNS services so that people can purchase constrained views of the internet DNS landscape?

Any the deployment of Anycast based routing to root and tld servers was done by technical people despite ICANN rather than with ICANN.

In the cloud computing area it has become abundantly clear that DNS simply does not do the job.

In clouds - where applications can split and merge and move - DNS simply is inadequate.

There are systems, such as IF-MAP, that are more agile than DNS and also are more immune than DNS to single points of failure or political control.

(Such new systems might use DNS names as internal tokens - so DNS isn't going away, rather it might simply be moved into the internet infrastructure basement where most users don't see it as distinctly as they do today.)

        --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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100701/0d485c36/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t