The kill-ICANN RFCs
jefsey at JEFSEY.COM
Fri Jun 10 16:05:02 CEST 2011
At 15:57 09/06/2011, Nicolas Adam wrote:
>Thx for reminding us that, not only alternatives may have merits on
>their own, but that they also bear political impact.
the difficulty (hence my more matter of fact subject) is to make
people accept the possible impact of the technology evolution on the
evolution of their daily use of technology use. RFC 5890-5895 and IAB
RFC 6055 technically examplify (in the naming case, simpler to
understand to GNSO members) that subisdiarity is the way the internet
architecture supports large diversities. They look complex, very
technical, etc. but in practical GNSO/ICANN terms they imply that the
single root is to be virtual, i.e. co-manageable by billions of
physical root files similar to the ICANNNTIA one.
This is not something new or that anyone can change. This is one of
the three basic principles of the Internet architecture: adaptability
(RFC 1958 - in 1998) of the large systems, simplicity (RFC 3439 -
2020) of the very large systems and subsidiarity (these RFCs - in
2010) of the very very large systems.
This means that core functions becomes weak if they keep being
(de)centralized in front of large diversities that actually need
pervasive coherent local responsibility. This means that the current
ICANN is inadequate to the Internet TLD diversity they want to
deploy. In selling their first new gTLD they will commit suicide. And
havoc in the internet.
This results from a fundamental flaw in the ICANN's conception. This
flaw is a commercial misreading of subsidiarity as to "foster
competition" while technically subsidiarity is the mutual respect of
everyone's own reponsibility. ICANN selling TLDs is like
Einsteing deciding to agree with Ptolemy. ICANN is incompatible with
the Internet size they want to trigger.
This time there will be no alternate roots.
- for speed, security, reliability, empowerment reasons I do not use
any root server for years. On Windows. Intelligent users will do like me.
- Google will start helping managing and supporting "root names" (the
name Bob Tréhin gave to ccTLDs in 1977).
Please remember Vint Cerf, Google Internet VP, was the Chair of the
WG/IDNAbis which worked out these RFCs I was eventually able to
support after a ten years dispute to get them.
Please remember that ICANN was created because Jon Postel tried what
these RFCs lead to. It was pure Internet legacy architectural
visionnary management. Only the ICANN concept could stop it, and it
did for a decade. Until the ICANN Australian Naming Team decided to
sell TLDs M$ 250 a piece.
facilitator, iucg at ietf.org
More information about the Ncuc-discuss