Ronda Hauben on Fri, 25 Oct 2002 13:12:43 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> 'IANA' to revoke .su ccTLD? |
Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi@yahoo.com> on Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 wrote: >Voicing dissent against visible "enemy" attracts attention, promotes >action and justified anger by public/followers. I propose that >the "enemy" here is a false one, and all this commotion just serves >as a security valve to let the steam out, steam that could be harnessed >to deal with real problems.... While I see dissent as helpful, rather than a security valve, I agree that the effort should be to identify the real problem and to determine what can be done to solve it. >The real issue is how to sidestep the current DNS with its root servers >controlled by people that didn't quite managed to become politicians, but >thanks to this internet thingie got some sort of power anyways. I disagree that the real issue is the current DNS with its root servers. I have just written an article about the nature of the infrastructure of the Internet that is in danger of being handed over to ICANN by the U.S. Department of Commerce. In the article I explain: "(....)The least critical aspect of this infrastructure is the DNS. The Internet could function using IP numbers in place of the names, just as telephone addressing is in general by numbers, rather than names. But the IP numbers and protocols are critical to the functioning of the Internet." >From "The Internet and Its Governance: Where Should We Look for Models?" Article url: http://www.circleid.com/articles/2545.asp Unfortunately, the real issue is *not* how to sidestep the current DNS with its root servers controlled by people that didn't quite managed to become politicians, but thanks to this internet thingie got some sort of power anyways. The *real issue* as I understand it is that the IP numbers are critical for the tcp/ip protocol and those have been put into ICANN's hands. The IP numbers must be unique for the messages to have a destination on the Internet. Also the protocol process is critical as the protocols make it possible for communication to occur. ICANN is also being put in charge of the protocol process. There needs to be some means of creating a form to protect these critical aspects of the Internet's infrastructure. (Port numbers are also an issue, and are something that the old IANA handled, and perhaps someone on this list can say a bit about their significance. Here it seems just a matter of keeping track of them but also this is an important technical function that is part of the Internet's technical infrastructure.) >There are several ongoing sidestepping efforts. The feat is quite doable >technically, what is missing is evangelisation. In the past alternate roots >were just attempts by wannabees to create TLDs without ICANN's blessing and >oiling and then make some money. Only distributed solutions have chance to make >ICANN irrelevant without becoming one. That is worth investing time in. And >many do. I agree that distributed solutions to the Domain Name problem are possible and probably the future. In my research about the history of the international collaboration that created the tcp/ip protocol suite, I came across the fact that early on the University College London (UCL) had its own form of domain name system, and the US had its form of system, and the early tcp/ip development were not affected by the fact that these were different systems for naming. I am working on a draft of a paper on the early international collaboration that made the development of tcp/ip possible. I hope to be able to make the paper available for comment shortly. Ronda ronda@ais.org http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120 http://www.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers ----- End forwarded message ----- # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net