A long long time ago, the efforts to network computers together were on two distonct and parallel courses. TCP/IP was one and OSI was the other. Governments of the world, through the ITU maintain their own OSI/X.400 namespace. In fact the NTIA of the DoC maintain the US X.400 root. We've seen how wildy successful X.400 is. Governments of the world already control one namespace, despite the fact it never really worked and hardly anybody uses it.
The Internet, OTOH grew wildly largely because of the "anybody with a clue can play" attitude and the contributiuons to infrastructure and content from people like you. If you want governments to control your namespace, why don't you use X.400 - then you'll have what you wish for. But, if you relish the idea of a namespace without central control, rather, controlled at the edges by the people with the root passwords to the nets nameservers - who can point them to any root server system - then you might be happier with the DNS.
IBM spent at least 2 years (maybe more, my data is 2 years old) of it's $60M/yr Washington lobbying budget to prevent the creation of new TLDs to protect its trademarks.
That's just one thing we've found out. You'd be a fool to believe they were the only ones.
Apart from a dog and pony show in Stockholm with some V6 blocks that nobody really uses, ICANN never allocated an IP address in it's life. You might be thinking of IANA (may he rest in peace)
The DoC has temporary custody of the legacy root servers because at the interagency domain name task force meetings, the DoC claimed to have all the answers. When the other 13 agencies (NSF, CIA, etc) stopped giggling, they said "ok, run with it".
To say "the US government controls the DNS" is factually incorrect. The US Department of commerce has control over the legacy root servers. That's very different. The sum of the DNS is controlled at the edges of the net by the people that have the root passwords to the namesevers that actually make the net work. If they were to all point to different root servers, the DoC would be in charge of 13 servers nobody used.
However, the notion of using root servers has always been IMO, a little silly. In the transition from the hosts.txt model to the decentralized DNS model, reliance on root servers to point to the tld servers for you is placing far too much faith on those 13 machine. Again IMO the proper way to do this is to secodnary the root zone - any root zone - ICANN's, ORSC's, what have you) thus saving you an intermediate step in looking up names. In other words, you won't need to hit the root servers to find the tld servers, your namesever will know where to find them itself. That same time and network bandwidth.
And of course if you secondary the ORSC root, you'll be able to see the entire Internet, not just the parts the DoC allows you to see.
Do you really think any government controlled domani agency would ever let you see http://free.tibet ?
That's the most profound effect your people can do for the least amount of effort. While I coordinate the ORSC root zone, I'd be happy to see you guys point to any of the alternatives (although obviously I think the ORSC one is better).
CLEARING UP SOME MISCONCEPTIONS
on
IETF vs. ICANN
·
· Score: 1
The drafts were written by Simon Higgs; they are not products of the IETF. There are people at all levels in the IETF that agree and disagree with themm.
Simon was aksed by Jon to write the replacement for RFC1591 and did so. There has never been any debate on the techncial merits of any of this stuff, in the IETF or otherwise, nor can there be as long as some guys step up and say "we're in charge"
Right after Simon published son-of-1591 and set up the shared registry mailing list,
Don Heath (ISOC) met Bob Shaw (ITU) and Albert Tramposch (WIPO) at an OECD workshop and strong-armed Jon into the IAHC debacle which was in turn shut off by the US Government and has risen, phoenix like, from the ashes as ICANN, albeit in a more maccinated and Byzantine guise.
There have been a core (pardon the pun) group, that Simon is one of, that have worked together since the beginning of all this and independant of the I* organizations as they show up, then fall off, the radar. Today this group uses ORSC as a nexus. The genesis of this can be seen on the NEWDOM mailing list archives.
We think we have a good blend of techies, lawyers, average users and a couple of bona fide net.gods (Brian Reid and Einar Stefferud); indeed if you look at the early ICANN stuff you'll see the US government tell ICANN to talk to ORSC; they didn't listen to our principles and they stopped calling. Oh well.
Wanna try an aternate root? Try ours, we think it's the best.
I'd give you urls to our websites but they suck, we really do need to work on them. Instead we've been working on building a pretty decent root server network, deploying tlds, registries and a new improved whois service (code is free, just ask) and working on alliances.
So if you want to see pretty alt root websites, look at everyones elses. They've spent a lot of time on them.
At ORSC we believe no one company or entity should be in control of the root. We see it as a producers cooperative run by people working in collegial manner. We don't believe in press releases, we do believe in quietly resolving collisions in new domain space both at the tld and sld level. Every day the alternative namespace has a few less collisions. By the end of the year there's a very good chance there will be one unified alternative namespace regardless of how many root server clusters there are.
I believe we are at a critical point in the politics of DNS on the net, and if there is some
degree of unity among all the independant roots so you always get the domain you think you shold get when you type something into the location line of Netscape we would all be better served.
So poke around alt.root land. Look at whose a jerk and who seems cooperative and hitch your wagon to their root. There are good guys and bad huys on both sides of the DNS wars, find out who they are. But most importantly:
TAKE BACK THE INTERNET.
Re:Internet-Drafts are an open process
on
IETF vs. ICANN
·
· Score: 1
No. Why subject those half of the IETF to abuse from the usual suspects?
WIPO already has it's mind made up. You can contradict everything they say and back this up with the most exquisite reasoning and all you'll get is your name in the back listing "poeple who participated in the process" and they'll ignore everything you say. That's what happened with Version 1 of this nonsense and have we all forgotten how badly they screwed over our own Michael Froomkin?
WIPO has no place in the management of the network. Let them stick the court system where they properly belong.
.DOT was the absolute first new TLD. It was deployed by Christian Neilson around 1996 and predates all other efforts. It's available through the ORSC and TINC root zones.
I upgraded to BIND 9 and had problems right off the bat, to say nothing of the fact it's 10X the size of BIND8. DJBDNS is one Slick package. It rawks. Very, very elegant. http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html
BIND 9 is supposed to have been written by a "team of professionals". From where? Microsoft? Guys that were "let go" because they wrote code too buggy and bloated for M$? DJBDNS shows once again one guy with a major clue beats a "team of professionals" every time.
Thanks for getting us this far, Vix and Co., but you can sit down now.
They wern't accepting mail from ONE of my IP's (out of many) either. I got through very quickly and easily. There is trick, but I have this nasty feeling if I say what it is it won't work any more.:-(
What do we need root servers for anyway? Secondary the root zone from the DNS provider of your choice and primary "." for yourself. Vote with your nameserver.
I created a separate mailbox for eBay stuff and found that I get maybe one announcement a month from eBay and they were at least semi-interesting.
But, I get about 20 spams a week to that account which is only published on eBay. Bottom line: eBay announcements don't hold a candle to the amount of spam you get from eBay derived addresses.
IOD is not "pre-registering" names. They are "registering" names just like Jon Postel told them to go ahead and do - and charge money for it - at a meeting at IANA in the late 90's. Michael Gerstand and Simon Higgs were also at that meeting.
Agreed. If you survey the DNS landscape it's easy to see the trend is away from 3rd and fourth level domains as the point of regstration. Ireland as well as Canada just dumped this silly ass idea; there are others but I don't remember them off the top of my head.
Slashdot Mirror
Talk to me... I know squat about P2p.
A long long time ago, the efforts to network computers together were on two distonct and parallel courses. TCP/IP was one and OSI was the other. Governments of the world, through the ITU maintain their own OSI/X.400 namespace. In fact the NTIA of the DoC maintain the US X.400 root. We've seen how wildy successful X.400 is. Governments of the world already control one namespace, despite the fact it never really worked and hardly anybody uses it.
The Internet, OTOH grew wildly largely because of the "anybody with a clue can play" attitude and the contributiuons to infrastructure and content from people like you. If you want governments to control your namespace, why don't you use X.400 - then you'll have what you wish for. But, if you relish the idea of a namespace without central control, rather, controlled at the edges by the people with the root passwords to the nets nameservers - who can point them to any root server system - then you might be happier with the DNS.
IBM spent at least 2 years (maybe more, my data is 2 years old) of it's $60M/yr Washington lobbying budget to prevent the creation of new TLDs to protect its trademarks.
That's just one thing we've found out. You'd be a fool to believe they were the only ones.
Apart from a dog and pony show in Stockholm with some V6 blocks that nobody really uses, ICANN never allocated an IP address in it's life. You might be thinking of IANA (may he rest in peace)
The DoC has temporary custody of the legacy root servers because at the interagency domain name task force meetings, the DoC claimed to have all the answers. When the other 13 agencies (NSF, CIA, etc) stopped giggling, they said "ok, run with it".
To say "the US government controls the DNS" is factually incorrect. The US Department of commerce has control over the legacy root servers. That's very different. The sum of the DNS is controlled at the edges of the net by the people that have the root passwords to the namesevers that actually make the net work. If they were to all point to different root servers, the DoC would be in charge of 13 servers nobody used.
However, the notion of using root servers has always been IMO, a little silly. In the transition from the hosts.txt model to the decentralized DNS model, reliance on root servers to point to the tld servers for you is placing far too much faith on those 13 machine. Again IMO the proper way to do this is to secodnary the root zone - any root zone - ICANN's, ORSC's, what have you) thus saving you an intermediate step in looking up names. In other words, you won't need to hit the root servers to find the tld servers, your namesever will know where to find them itself. That same time and network bandwidth.
And of course if you secondary the ORSC root, you'll be able to see the entire Internet, not just the parts the DoC allows you to see.
Do you really think any government controlled domani agency would ever let you see http://free.tibet ?
Post with an email address using a subdomain under your aegis. After a couple of days change the MX record of that subdomain to localhost.
People wanting to contact you about old posts won't be able to of course, they'd have to find a recent post of yours.
But spam would never hit your network and with any luck it'd make a right dogs breakfast out of theirs.
Richard Sexton
No, the other one
Somebody set up the tld servers for .comsucks and I'll add it ot the ORSC root zone. I have working registry software too, if needed...
R. Sexton.
You can find me
That's the most profound effect your people can do for the least amount of effort. While I coordinate the ORSC root zone, I'd be happy to see you guys point to any of the alternatives (although obviously I think the ORSC one is better).
Start from there. The rest will come naturally.
http://support.open-rsc.org/How_To
http://free.tibet
rich@rd.sexton
Sincerely,
Richarde,
Webmaster http://www.dnso.com
Simon was aksed by Jon to write the replacement for RFC1591 and did so. There has never been any debate on the techncial merits of any of this stuff, in the IETF or otherwise, nor can there be as long as some guys step up and say "we're in charge"
Right after Simon published son-of-1591 and set up the shared registry mailing list, Don Heath (ISOC) met Bob Shaw (ITU) and Albert Tramposch (WIPO) at an OECD workshop and strong-armed Jon into the IAHC debacle which was in turn shut off by the US Government and has risen, phoenix like, from the ashes as ICANN, albeit in a more maccinated and Byzantine guise.
There have been a core (pardon the pun) group, that Simon is one of, that have worked together since the beginning of all this and independant of the I* organizations as they show up, then fall off, the radar. Today this group uses ORSC as a nexus. The genesis of this can be seen on the NEWDOM mailing list archives.
We think we have a good blend of techies, lawyers, average users and a couple of bona fide net.gods (Brian Reid and Einar Stefferud); indeed if you look at the early ICANN stuff you'll see the US government tell ICANN to talk to ORSC; they didn't listen to our principles and they stopped calling. Oh well.
Wanna try an aternate root? Try ours, we think it's the best.
I'd give you urls to our websites but they suck, we really do need to work on them. Instead we've been working on building a pretty decent root server network, deploying tlds, registries and a new improved whois service (code is free, just ask) and working on alliances.
So if you want to see pretty alt root websites, look at everyones elses. They've spent a lot of time on them.
At ORSC we believe no one company or entity should be in control of the root. We see it as a producers cooperative run by people working in collegial manner. We don't believe in press releases, we do believe in quietly resolving collisions in new domain space both at the tld and sld level. Every day the alternative namespace has a few less collisions. By the end of the year there's a very good chance there will be one unified alternative namespace regardless of how many root server clusters there are.
I believe we are at a critical point in the politics of DNS on the net, and if there is some degree of unity among all the independant roots so you always get the domain you think you shold get when you type something into the location line of Netscape we would all be better served.
So poke around alt.root land. Look at whose a jerk and who seems cooperative and hitch your wagon to their root. There are good guys and bad huys on both sides of the DNS wars, find out who they are. But most importantly:
TAKE BACK THE INTERNET.
No. Why subject those half of the IETF to abuse from the usual suspects?
http://images.vrx.net/buttons/rfc1149now.jpg
Do what you want with it.
WIPO already has it's mind made up. You can contradict everything they say and back this up with the most exquisite reasoning and all you'll get is your name in the back listing "poeple who participated in the process" and they'll ignore everything you say. That's what happened with Version 1 of this nonsense and have we all forgotten how badly they screwed over our own Michael Froomkin? WIPO has no place in the management of the network. Let them stick the court system where they properly belong.
.DOT was the absolute first new TLD. It was deployed by Christian Neilson around 1996 and predates all other efforts. It's available through the ORSC and TINC root zones.
I upgraded to BIND 9 and had problems right off the bat, to say nothing of the fact it's 10X the size of BIND8. DJBDNS is one Slick package. It rawks. Very, very elegant. http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html
BIND 9 is supposed to have been written by a "team of professionals". From where? Microsoft? Guys that were "let go" because they wrote code too buggy and bloated for M$? DJBDNS shows once again one guy with a major clue beats a "team of professionals" every time.
Thanks for getting us this far, Vix and Co., but you can sit down now.
They wern't accepting mail from ONE of my IP's (out of many) either. I got through very quickly and easily. There is trick, but I have this nasty feeling if I say what it is it won't work any more. :-(
The meta-tendancy is towards a unified alternative root zone. AOL can do what it wants, but if they buck that trend they're an Island.
The political reality of 2001 is, they won't do anything though. They're an ICANN registrar and ICANN will pull their accredidation if they did.
What do we need root servers for anyway? Secondary the root zone from the DNS provider of your choice and primary "." for yourself. Vote with your nameserver.
http://support.open-rsc.org
I created a separate mailbox for eBay stuff and found that I get maybe one announcement a month from eBay and they were at least semi-interesting.
But, I get about 20 spams a week to that account which is only published on eBay. Bottom line: eBay announcements don't hold a candle to the amount of spam you get from eBay derived addresses.
Well, you could argue that the UUCP network was a grassroots effort. Until 1994 it was larger than the TCP/IP connected internet. Napster? Hmmmm....
Those guys will bid on anything.
IOD is not "pre-registering" names. They are "registering" names just like Jon Postel told them to go ahead and do - and charge money for it - at a meeting at IANA in the late 90's. Michael Gerstand and Simon Higgs were also at that meeting.
Pretty sad when J Random Drunk Slashdotter makes more sense than an entire sober ICANN board.
Pop quiz: which ICANN board member slept all though wednesdays TLD presentations then voted on them anyway? I'm not kidding)
Hey, I tried
Agreed. If you survey the DNS landscape it's easy to see the trend is away from 3rd and fourth level domains as the point of regstration. Ireland as well as Canada just dumped this silly ass idea; there are others but I don't remember them off the top of my head.