Hi This is my first posting to the IETF mailing lists, so please forgive me if I do something wrong. <snipped to get to the crux> > Solution 3. we keep going but we rebuild anew. This seems to be the > impossible ICANN policy in building their Intercontract system. It > obviously does not work and leads to strong oppositions. > The reason why I join the IETF debate is that I think > technology may be the > response. The same as the namespace agreement has aged, the same the > technology has aged. We are endlessly arguing on old stuff. Aftyer 20 > years, we need a clean sheet review of the DNS, based on > today and future > users' needs. IMHO this goes into two directions: a new DNS > core system > analysis (DNS.2) and an extended DNS services (DNS+) logic. > IMHO in going > ahead in that two directions (as the iDNs show the path) we will soon > discover that the ICANN preoccupations and solutions are > totally outdated > by what we will uncover and specify. > Obviously we will meet the same kind of oppositions to > DNS.2/DNS+ than was > met for IPv6. The question is then to know if this effort > will be carried > within the IETF or not. I think DNS.2 cannot be specified > outside of the > IETF but a DNS.1.B can. Most of DNS+, which comes before / > aside / on top > of the DNS, can be privately developped, but without proper > integration. > This would lead to a large number of proprietary solutions > and to large > splits in the usage of the network. > So the question is not to know if we have to make that effort > or not, but > if it will be a clean move or not. To take a comparison, > situation in the > DNS today is like if IPv8 was the only option. > Sorry to have been long. This all I had to say. > jfc IMHO Networking and Internetworking has changed in many ways since it was first introduced. I am fully aware of the history if the Internet and of how basic networks work. *BUT* The fundamentals of networking have not dramatically changed in all the time that we have used networks. Another, *BUT* and it's a big but, there is no way the original designers of networks could have any conception of just how much they have grown and expanded into the Corporate networks and the Internet that we have today. Since the underlying DNS structure was basic and simple it still works today, but (as many more technically qualified people could/will point out), only just! and it's limitations are showing. In practical reality it is simply not possible to "rip it out and start again". IPv4 needs to be replaced, however since NAT and a few other "temporary fixes" have given it extra life people have not moved onto IPv6 as much they should have(?) So solution 4 needs to be designed, IMHO we need a solution that can take what we have today and "evolve" into tomorrow's solution, which will actually be solution 5, and what we should have if we "ripped it out and started again" BUT (sorry I have to keep using this word atm) where to start..... Regards Sean Jones