On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Patrick Corliss wrote:

> As I say in my sig file, I am a Director of the Top Level Domain Association
> (TLDA).  This is an industry association set up by TLD holders (rather than
> the roots) to promote their TLD offerings.  It is also concerned to eliminate
> "colliding"TLDs.  It does not seek to overthrow ICANN.

> All of the current "alt" roots, except two, have agreed with each other to
> avoid colliders.  There is some disagreement about who has priority in
> relation to a particular TLD on a first com first served basis.  The main
> offender (i.e. who disregards priority TLD claims) is NewNet.

Why would anybody but ICANN have 'priority' ?
Who would make such a decision if not ICANN ?
Why would NewNet be any less entitled to use *any damn names they like*
than 'legacy' (if you could dignify them with the term) alternate roots ?

> Holders of TLDs can switch from one root to another without much of a problem.
> This causes the root managers to support the various TLDs in their portfolio.
> In such a system, the most successful root may be the one that includes the
> greatest number of TLDs on offer.  It must also not have any "colliders".

The point being, that at some point, in order to avoid 'colliders',
someone needs to be authoritative (i.e. an ICANN). Otherwise; you can
setup (for example) ".foo" and I can setup ".foo" and Joe across the rode
can setup ".foo"; and who is right ?

Explain which of the three clients that purchased "domain.foo" from the
three vendors is right ? And why ? And just *how* this is 'better' for the
punter than the existing system ?

> Each root manager can, if they wish, keep a subset of the alternate TLDs in
> their zone file provided they also include the ICANN set.  They do not
> necessarily need to keep a complete set.  Many root operators prefer the
> terminology of "inclusive root" rather than "alternate root"
> 
> The ability of these roots to live together has been explained by Karl
> Auerbach:
> 
> 2.  Multiple Roots are "a good thing"
> http://www.cavebear.com/cavebear/growl/issue_2.htm#multiple_roots

Hi Patrick,

No offence to Karl Auerbach; but this discussion seems to be more related
to 'ICANN is bad' and 'if condition 'x' is met, this is what will happen'
rather than a dissertation on just how this is possible given the current
infrastructure.

According to the above URL:

"I've used the phrase "viable TLDs" to describe those which are of a
character that most reasonable root system operators would feel that they
could incorporate that TLD into their inventory without undue risk of
problems.  It is easiest to define "viable TLDs" by listing what kind of
TLDs would be non-viable.  TLDs that are being contested are not very
viable.  Thus, if two or more claimants were offering different versions
of a TLD named ".foo", it would be unlikely that any root system operator
would add any version of ".foo" to the inventory."

- so to e.g. get rid of a competitor in this nirvana; all that is required
is to 'contest' their TLD. I fail to see how this serves the need of
*anybody* (apart from those selling the names, who have more to sell).

Without a 'single' root level server(s), maintained by a single body, no
single root server can find arbitrary domain 'x' unless they query every
other root server on the planet. If they do not query every other server,
how do they decide which to include, and which not to ? And if everyone is
allowed to run a root server, the task of finding domain 'x' becomes
hideously expensive.

This is inherent in the way the DNS works right now. Extensions (or a
replacement protocol) need to be written before this behaviour can be
modified. And perhaps that will happen; but not in the way that the
so-called 'Alternate Root' servers or vendors like New.Net are doing it
today.

> It will never happen partly because swags of people have other agendas.

Sure. People want to cut up the domain space and sell it; and because the
domain space is restricted they want to find ways to either a) cut it up
smaller or b) enlarge the space by defining new TLDs.

The funny thing is; there are enough names to go around right now.

Regards,

Saliya

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 321 subscribers. 
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request§auda.org.au to be removed.