Re: [ga] this is ICANN's legacy

[JFC Morfin <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 10:51 19/05/2006, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> I disagree.  The real question, or rather the initial question, is this:
> What gives ICANN the right to say who may and who may not try his or 
> her hand at entering the DNS business place?

We do.

We do in making ourselves believe the root server system is a need.

It tuns out that it was an efficient way for the Czar Jon to control 
his own network. Now the question is:
- is the Internet the ICANN's own network (meaning the US Network as 
voted by the Congress and accepted by Tunis)? In such a case it can 
legitimaly decide, or the Congress can.
- is ICANN one of the partners of the International Network 
intergovernance? In that case it is up to the users to chose its 
providers. Up to now the need was for ASCII TLDs having a global 
reach because the Internet was imposed as a single global relational 
space. This has come to an end with the US demand in Tunis. USA got 
an US space. China has organised a Chinese space. Many others will do 
the same. Now there are geolingual spaces to consider. If I want to 
get emergency help anywhere in the world I need ".sos" to resolve on 
a local and lingual basis. This means roughly 60 billions TLDs.

This does not mean we want to kill the DNS. But that we want to save 
it in adapting it to the network of today. Or it will continue to be 
the main cause of network fragmentation (with e-applications [English 
inside]). Let be smart for one minute and understand that a 
distributed multiautoritative system, as the Internet has become, 
cannot be supported - and is hurt - by a single centralised 
monoauthoritative solution as ICANN/IANA/RSSAC.

I you suppress the root server system, resolution will be carried at 
ISP level in using one or several stubs (including the NTIA 
Internationalised US Internet root file). This will foster 
competition (ICANN's charter) as customers will chose their ISP 
because of the accesses they provide. Access is not only to be abble 
to call. It is to be able to be called (permanent IP address) and to 
use the other party's name - even if that name does not please some. 
It should be put an end to the ICANN apartheid. We own our names, no one else.

The result of this appartheid is the development of ML.ML, keywords, 
alias and probably other namespaces. And the announced end of the DNS 
in cacophony.
jfc