OK, we now have several words used for suposedly the same thing. 1) ONE "MONOPOLY ROOT" OWNED and CONTROLLED" BY ICANN; making all decisions and leasing out TLD and lower domain name "holder-ships", which supposedly yields ONE SINGE ROOT controlled by ICANN. Also provides a pseudo-legal court system (UDRP) for adjudicating "holder" disputes below the ICANNIC root. Any domain names in use outside this construct are declared to be operated by PIRATE and Dishonest parties, whether they existed before ICANN came into existence or not, and even when created by Jon Postel pre-ICANN.
2) A "Consistent Set" of TLDs which do not include any collisions, and hopefully also do not endure any colliding domain names outside this Consistent Set. How the collisions are avoided apparently assumes some kind of communications system that is used for coordinating the introductions of new domain names to avoid introducing any and all collisions. 3) A "Centrally Coordinated Root" that entails some kind of communications system that is used for coordinating the introductions of new domain names to avoid introducing any and all collisions. I can see some equivalence between 2 and 3, both of which can be seen to achieve the desired result of a collision free root and thus a collision free DNS name tree, if this same coordination responsibility is attached to all delegations under the root. but, I see no justification for creation of a monopolistic single point of failure with the unilateral unquestioned power to unilaterally set many kinds of policies regarding registration business models and use rules for DNS names. Please explain how you see these relationships. Cheers...\Stef At 12:09 PM -0500 11/29/02, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Valdis.Kletni >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > > > >On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 12:45:23 PST, Einar Stefferud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sai > >d: > > > >> ICANN stands alone in its EXCLUSIVNESS, while arguing > >> that there must only be one root. All others must die! > > > >Think .BIZ. > > > >Now go back and *CAREFULLY* re-read RFC 2826. Note that nowhere > >does it say that ICANN has to be "the root". What it says is "either you > >have one centrally coordinated root, or you have Balkanization". > > > >This is precisely the point. It doesn't matter who selects the TLDs; >all that matters is that there be a consistent set. > > --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) > http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)
