>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Received: from USC-ECL.ARPA by SRI-NIC.ARPA with TCP; Sun 13 May 84 13:00:06-PDT
>Date: 13 May 1984 12:15-PDT
>Sender: ESTEFFERUD@USC-ECL
>Subject: Re: Domain requirements
>From: ESTEFFERUD@USC-ECL
>To: namedroppers@SRI-NIC
>Message-ID: <[USC-ECL]13-May-84 12:15:51.ESTEFFERUD>
>
>It seems to me that this new draft has gotten us into the troublesome
>turf of semantic definitions, wherein we attempt to carve up the world
>and assign responsibility and authority to non-existent entities for
>large ill-defined clusters of users and their service hosts.
>
>We need to back away from this direction and return to dealing with
>syntax, independent of who is going to get to be the real domain
>authorities.  The real domain authorities are going to be selected by
>some political processes that are not identified well enough, in any
>of the drafts we have considered, to allow us to seriously consider
>deciding on any of the TOP level domains, ARPA included.  
>
>It is my expectation that when the dust has settled, ARPA will
>become what is actually is: a sub-domain of DDN that just happens to
>be the lead community in development of network research and
>technology.
>
>I think at this point we should all take a lesson from the IFIP6.5
>work on addressing, wherein is is clearly recognized that
>international politics must be served (certainly not ignored or
>resisted).  This is evidenced by several references to the realization
>that COUNTRY pre-empts the default position TOP level domain
>authorities.  We must cope with the fact that xyz.ARPA.DDN.US is a
>very likely future domain address.
>
>And, within the US, we must realize that UUCP is a rational domain,
>just because it is there, and it is large, and it supports a large
>number of people who are fully dependent on it, in spite of its
>deficiencies.  There are other such domains that will not accept
>subversion either.
>
>So, we can choose to spend our time sorting through this political
>morass without either the political savy nor political clout to
>resolve anything, or we can go back to working on the technical
>syntactic structure within which the political decisions will
>eventually be made.
>
>The main criterion for success will be whether we can invent a
>technical structure that will prevent political decisions from making
>a mess of Internet implementations.  There just ain't no way that us
>techies are going to be allowed to dictate domain structures beyond
>the current bounds of the ARPA and DDN sub-nets.  
>
>Reset, Restart  ...  Stef


-- 
Richard Sexton  |  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.net      http://www.mbz.org       http://www.dnso.com
Bannockburn, Ontario, Canada,  70 & 72 280SE, 83 300SD   +1 (613) 473-1719

Reply via email to