> Dear John, > thank you to make the point. > > At 17:35 05/03/2006, John C Klensin wrote: > >There are no "independent root-servers" in China, or at least > >none that anyone official is willing to claim. > > This IS the point. There is no independent root-servers. The other > point is: there is no change for two years. And yet there are tens of > thousands of registrants and millions of users. This means there is a > new - non IETF documented - way to manage the namespace. And > therefore a new form of Governance. No there isn't. It there was they would be visible to all machines that believe they have Internet access without having to manually wire them in. > >Next? > > If China can do it for several years, without anyone even noticing or > feeling or wanting being concerned, it means there is no problem > organising externets. Good. This means that others can (and will) > copy them. Your "next?" is their IETF blessing. The ICP-3 test bed is > completed. The ICP-3 criteria are met. What Chinese did is no > problem. The "problem" is with the next one: or is that what you mean?. > > jfc Lots of people graft all sorts of names onto the DNS for their internal namespaces often at the top level. This is of itself no problem so long as the top level namespace is stable. The moment the top level namespace becomes unstable you run the risk of name space clashes. You force people to rename their internal machines. And before you say they should get there own domain paid for domain name. Do you really expect every home user with a home network that doesn't need to be addressable by name from the internet to pony up the fees just to prevent a name clash. Try picking a semi-meaningful unused name under COM for your internal namespace and see how long it is before you are forced to rename:-) Dot should be kept small. It should be small enough to be transfered to embedded boxes along with IP6.ARPA, IN-ADDR.ARPA and ARPA with all of these zones signed. If this was being done by all iterative resolvers when Sri Lanka went off the air internal communications within Sri Lanka would have had a much better chance of just continuing to work for the time it took to fix the cables. It wouldn't have been perfect but it would have helped. Mark > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf