Re: [IFWP] ICANN position on multiple roots

[Onno Hovers]

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jay Fenello wrote:
> Sorry again, Jonathan,

> This question presumes that ICANN has inherited 
> the IANA root.  I most strongly object to such 
> a conclusion.  

> To repeat, ICANN does NOT have any *legitimate* 
> claim to manage the old IANA root.  

> The last authoritative, community-based consensus 
> on that question was the White Paper, which ICANN 
> has ignored since its inception.  (overly kind as 
> this may be :-)

And how would that make a difference? Or to go back
to the topic of alternative roots: why would a not
so perfectly managed ICANN root system have to be
afraid of even less perfectly managed alternatives?

How little of the white paper and how little of the 
community consensus is implemented in (for example)
the ORSC root?

Regards,
-- 
Onno Hovers, MS/Ir, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]