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

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

On 2000-11-29 10:41:40 -0500, t byfield wrote:

> and so on. this conversation about roots is 99.9% theology, imo,
> and ICANN is the rough equivalent of an avignon pope.

The quote from the ccTLD constituency about "going nuclear" gives a
little hint about what they can actually threaten with: Mutually
Assured Destruction.

Look at either side's nuclear options: (1) either ccTLDs are removed
from the "official" root, or (2) they remove themselves from the
"official" root (by changing, for instance, nameservers' IP
addresses), taking root services from someone else. Note that the
latter option is the only way by which ccTLD operators could try to
force users and ISPs into using a root different from the default
one.

Also note that each of these options implies that certain ccTLDs
would not be available to those who continue to use the default
root.

Of course, these options would generate a major desaster for the net
- one which governments (and the ISP and user communities!) would
most likely not want to see for a second time.  The most likely
consequences would be that (1) ICANN would be replaced by a
government-driven entity, and that (2) ccTLDs would find themselves
replaced by entirely government-driven entities.  That is, use of
the "nuclear option" would result in the assured destruction of
ICANN as we know it _and_ in the assured destruction of the ccTLD
operator structure we know today.

I'm convinced that neither ICANN nor the ccTLD operators wish such
effects.  Nevertheless, it's important to know and to note that both
sides have access to triggers for self-destruction of the current
DNS structure.

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