Re: [atlarge-discuss] HOWTO send a message to ICANN

[Joe Baptista <baptista@dot-god.com>]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 david@aminal.com wrote:

> Point four is interesting, and I wonder where you got this impression.
>
> It is not correct.
>
> Correctly implemented, inclusive namespaces put no additional load on
> the ICANN sanctioned root servers. In fact, the system I implemented
> here at Speco puts no load at all on those root servers at all, because
> the function they perform is handled locally by our system.
>
> <snip>

check nanog presentation - page 31

http://www.caida.org/outreach/presentations/2002/nanog0210/

or read my story which translates it into the non-technical john and jane
bit.

> > The problem I see with this method of protest, Joe, is that we
> > Internet users want the Internet to be stable, reliable and
> > accessible to everyone. If we 1,000 took your advice and not
> > only used that URL ourselves but encouraged all our friends and
> > relations to do so, we'd be causing a "technical disaster" with
> > an effect opposite to what we want.
>
> No technical disaster, people who use these systems simply bypass
> ICANN controlled infrastructure.

but what about those who have not bypassed - the majority.  what about
those clicks.  every click is a question to the isp dns resolvers which
gets in turn passed on to the roots which return an NXDOMAIN.  granted
this only happens once within any nameserver cycle - but it's enough to
swamp the results on the usg root servers - where 3,000 hits is
respectable for a tld.

> > There is also no guarantee that the official response to the
> > disaster would be anything other than lumping us in with the vandals
> > and terrorists: that is, finding ways to arrest and prosecute us for
> > malicious attacks on the Internet. And somehow I doubt that this
> > kind of "voting" would count with the technical community as
> > anything but another problem.
>
> Again, I am very curious as to how you got the impression that not
> using the ICANN domain name system infrastructure could be considered
> vandalism or a malicious attack on the Internet.

i dont think it's in any way malicious.  it will simply be noticed at the
usg root level.  incidentally - paul and i - paul vixie who provided the
stats were arguing over - i hope you have looked them up by now - is
refusing to provide any supporting evidence.  he's just told caida in
private email that they are banned from providing or making any of their
data public.

apparently paul is claiming privacy etc and a commercial interest in the
data itself.  i agree with him - it's valuable data.

> > I'd like to see this group start by articulating exactly
> > what is wrong with the U.S./ICANN model for administration and
> > governance of the Internet and lobbying against the "crony
> > capitalism" as well as for improvements in both the technical
> > underpinnings and the inclusion of Internet users in a more
> > transparent and democratic process. I think we would need to
> > do that in layman's language, so that all of our members and
> > all of the technically-unadept politicians could understand
> > what we're talking about.
> >
>
> The domain name system is not as mysterious or complex as you
> might think.

i don't think that - it's very simple.  the stupidity is in those who even
still bother to support icann.

> I agree that it is important to make the concepts accessible to
> laypeople, and I'd like to help to do that.
>
> Please feel free to contact me (privately might be best for now),
> and I'll do my best to explain the hows and whys of the DNS.
>
> If I'm succesfull, perhaps we can distill the results into
> something that will be usefull for the whole group.

your always welcomed to call after 6:30 pm est - 705-872-1310 and we can
chat.

but read my stuff first and examine page 31 of the caida report to nanog.

that basically answers all your questions where i derived the methodology.
which is basically based on faith the data from caida is real.  i do have
faith thats the case i just suspect they hide it because it show real
damage and is the best argument that the usg root can't ignore inclusive
namespace without suffering damage in return.


cheers
joe


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de