On Jul 24, 2008, at 4:24 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes wrote:
The problem is, once the ICANNt root is self-signed, the hope of ever
revoking that dysfunctional mess as authority is gone.
Sorry, I don't follow -- sounds like FUD to me. Care to explain this?
As far as I'm aware, as long as the KSK isn't compromised, changing
the organization who holds the KSK simply means waiting until the next
KSK rollover and have somebody else do the signing.
Perhaps the IETF
You mean oh say IANA?
or DoC
That'll be popular in the international community.
should sign the root, that way we have a prayer
of wresting control from ICANN, as opposed to paying a tax, in
perpetuity, for registration services to an unaccountable, unelected,
and imperious body?
Registration fees are unrelated to signing the root, but thanks for
the gratuitous ICANN bashing. It was missing in this thread -- I was
wondering when it would show up.
Some of us don't think the UN/EU/ITU are good models for governance.
Indeed.
IE: Separation of powers. ICANN/IANA is granted (interim) authority to
operate, but some other governing body signs.
So you want to increase the role ICANN/IANA has in root zone
management. Interesting.
Regards,
-drc
