[governance] IGF and TLDs

[Karl Auerbach]

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