Re: [icann-eu] Re: [ICANN-EU] ccTLDs to ask for BoD seats?

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

On 2000-11-30 13:31:13 +0100, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Indeed, a number of "wild" roots exist, but the impact thereof is
> close to zero. OTOH, supposing that some ccTLDs will create a new
> root, the impact will be immediately considerable, therefore the
> amount of money involved will be enough motivation for market
> forces to start acting. In practical terms, until there's only
> one (meaningful) root, everybody will think twice before starting
> a new one. Once you have two, more roots will mushroom.

Assuming that the ccTLDs don't change their servers' IP addresses -
why should anyone change to such a "wild root", even when the ccTLDs
prefer that one and decide to ignore ICANN? 

We shouldn't forget that (1) users don't pay directly for access to
root services and that (2) unless it fails working, there is on
reason to change the root servers you are using.

Also, we shouldn't forget that ICANN won't have an interest in
removing the ccTLDs from "its" root (currently, they couldn't even
do that), since such an action would amount to calling the national
governments to the arms.  As I pointed out before, sabotage from the
ccTLDs' side would have a similar effect, and shouldn't be expected
to happen any time soon.

Thus, the only impact an alternative root set up by the ccTLDs could
possibly have would be to demonstrate a larger independence from
ICANN, and to leave them with the options of (1) accepting whatever
the ccTLD operators do, or (2) trying threaten with the removal from
the "official" root, which would imply ICANN's self-destruction.

-- 
Thomas Roessler                         <roessler@does-not-exist.org>