[icann-europe] Re: [ecdiscuss] Re: [icann-europe] European Root Server System

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

hmmm.... It seems that most did not understand the issue on the European 
Root Server System.

1. obviously this has nothing to do with domain names.
2. this has also nothing to do with root file.
3. this obviously does not "split" the world nor the internet, to the 
countray it helps it not to be split in time of crisis.
4. this is already implemented at several ccTLDs, China and USG (mil), 
extranets and ISPs
5. this has only to do with availablity of a key service to our policy, 
security and economy.

This service is the real time response to querries to a 1909 lines 89.670 
character table available to all via FTP, 60% of these querries resulting 
from typos. This architectural oddity of the 80s results from a totla lack 
of interest of everyone in this file until Joe Sims decided to use it as a 
tool for ICANN power and money. Like if you sent the shuttle in the space 
using cobol programs.

It is obvious that secondary root server systems are necessary. Question is 
not yes/not. Question are why when? why how? who can benefit from it, why? 
Who should foot the bill? Do we put that into the ITU/T deal or not? Do we 
put that issue under ".eu" supervision? Which technolgy to use: European or 
developped and licensed by MS/Verisign?
jfc



















On 14:26 22/04/02, Vittorio Bertola said:
>On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 12:33:50 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >Multiple rootservers, even with a high level of "synchronisation", gives
> >way to the possibility that a domain may be registered to two separate
> >users. This is the big big big golden rule in domain registration - don't
> >ever let a domain be registered to more than one person/org!
>
>This is not necessarily a problem - don't confuse root servers with
>registries: you would still have one worldwide registry for each gTLD,
>and unique registrations - simply it would be pointed to by different
>root server systems (unless the two root server systems actually
>*wanted* to point to different registries and different registrants
>for the same domain, but then there would definitely be a valid reason
>to do so).
>
>So, to clarify again: I hope that there won't be the need to actually
>have more than one root server system, and certainly I wouldn't have
>considered this option if we had an open and international ICANN.
>However, if I were the EU, rather than being potentially hostage of a
>root server system controlled by the US and by a malfunctioning and
>US-centric ICANN, I'd rather set up my own one. Then, I'd do all my
>best to agree policies with them, and not to break the net - but at
>least, I'd have the ultimate weapon of doing so, and I would be able
>to negotiate on a fair level, rather than from a position of weakness.
>
>And are you sure you can afford the risk that at the next trade war
>between the US and the EU, for example, the US decides to retaliate by
>blocking the creation of the .eu domain? Or that an US court can rule
>about what all the root servers but three should do or not do? Would
>you be happy if the US Congress decides for you (as a proposed bill
>currently under discussion) that a .xxx domain has to be immediately
>created and all registrations for porn sites under .com/net/org are
>then deleted?
>
>This, I agree, might be a sad view, if compared to the hope (which I
>do have) for a united network serving a united world, but in the end
>the world is still made of nations and national interests, especially
>now that the Internet has become a vital part of any nation's wealth
>and security; on the other hand, the ICANN-US system has openly showed
>that it does not care to consider the needs of the individual users
>and communities outside US, nor those of the ccTLDs (which should just
>"pay and obey") - it did not even start to translate its official
>documents in languages other than English.
>
>Perhaps the project of an European root system, even if still on
>paper, could help in fostering the creation of a better replacement
>for ICANN, given that years of struggle and complaints didn't get to
>anything more than being laughed at.
>--
>.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo vb.
>Vittorio Bertola     <vb@vitaminic.net>    Ph. +39 011 23381220
>Vitaminic [The Music Evolution] - Vice President for Technology
>
>DISCLAIMER, PLEASE NOTE: This communication is intended only for use by the
>addressee. It may contain confidential or privileged information.
>Transmission, distribution and/or copy cannot be permitted. Please notify
>immediately the sender by replying if you are not the intended recipient.


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