On Feb 14, 2012, at 9:22 AM, Paul Vixie wrote: > are you sharing insider knowledge from your time as IANA GM here?
Nope. > i > thought that ICANN and VeriSign were both under enforceable contracts > with respect to their role as root name server operators. As far as I'm aware (and happy for any of the root operators to correct me), the only actual contract is between U.S. Dept. of Commerce and VeriSign for the operation of the "A" (and "J"?) root server(s). That's part of the irrationality of root service -- it isn't even clear between whom contracts should be. > inside baseball warning. the agreement signed between ISC and ICANN on > january 23 2008 is not "enforceable" in that it does not specify any > recourse for either party due to any nonperformance by the other party. Yep. "We acknowledge you exist, you acknowledge we exist, and we might think about discussing the possibility of perhaps considering doing some undefined stuff someday in the future. Or maybe not." With that said, it was a step in the right direction. Not aware of any further steps, but I haven't been paying attention. Regards, -drc _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
