[ICANN-EU] Distributed root

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

At 00:30 27/10/00, Harald wrote:
>At 09:47 26/10/2000 +0200, Christian.Ahlert@sowi.uni-giessen.de wrote:
>>My question to all the techies on this list: Is this a mere justification
>>of the current structure ( a claim to centralized power), or what?
>It is intended to be an explanation of how the current technology works, 
>and why it has to be that way to continue to work as well as it does today.
>Two different net.resources with the same name, where some people see one 
>resource and some people see the other, is a failure under the assumptions 
>that current Internet software has built into it.
>A single root is the only method we know works for keeping that from 
>happening.
>Disclaimer: I was part of the group that wrote this. I am biased.

Sure you are biased !  :-)

In fact you know how much I am against your vision ... for exactly the same 
reasons as you are for.

Also you love mixing centralized (what it is to day) , distributed roots 
(what it is actually to day), federative root (what the ICANN should do, ie 
accepting any new TLD), alt.root (unbalanced distributed roots on private 
machines) and private root (only the TLD I want) with TLD clones (same TLD 
string with different addresses and IP resolution). I know this is just to 
help making people believe this extremely simple issue is complex ;-).

Since we agree, we are both right, and I will wind only because you want to 
stick to the today usage and usages change over the time.

What we shoud consider more seriously is why we have this current 
"stability". This is because Bull Gates has not made a special screen in 
the network connexions under Windows to chose one's default root or to load 
it as an .ini file (what would be sensible). So it boils down this: the 
real stability if the massive choice of Windows by the public (@large) and 
therefore of the WinSocket. Let assume that today someone would propose a 
SuperSocket with a simple way to adapt the PC root, things would change 
dramitically. BTW is the dominant position on WinSock an issue in the MS case?
Take care.
Jefsey


PS. I suppose it would be a big blow to the UDRP system is someone started 
an alternative .com with all the pre UDRP decision situations restored 
(based upon your demand that the author's URL is respected). I would love 
seeing copyrights against TM fighting and I wonder how the ICANN would 
explain what a DN is.
This only means that all this ringmarole about TMs only comes from the way 
we today use the DNS program (half speed I would say) but is nothing 
structural. Since this use comes from you (you wrote that biased text :-)), 
I see *you* are the real core of the TM lobby !!! ;-) ;-)
Have a nice rest !!!