On 25 July 1999, Jim Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>
>At this point, what the Net needs is a more distributed DNS, one that has
>no single control point. What we have instead is ICANN, which is
>attempting to control not just the domain name system but the entire
>Internet. There is no need to speculate as to motives; as I said in
>my earlier posting, the one great lesson of the twentieth century is
>that concentrating power in one point is a recipe for disaster.
>
>What we need is diversity and variety, the opposite of what ICANN has on
>offer. For an example, consider routing. Routing across the Internet is
>handled by a large variety of organizations: ISPs of all sizes, schools,
>Internet exchanges of all types (the MAEs are owned by Worldcom, the
>LINX in London is a co-op of sorts, I believe that the exchange at CERN
>is funded by a consortium of governments, etc), trans-national corporations,
>and so forth and so on. There are now more than 12,000 autonomous systems,
>each at least potentially representing a different routing policy. The
>fearsome power of the Internet comes in large part from the ease with
>which anyone can plug into the Internet backbone and pour money and time
>into their own notion of how things ought to be done.
>
>This approach works. The approach taken in designing the DNS doesn't.
The more I think about this, the more I agree with this.
Is there anyone who could post a list detailing the locations of current
proposals for setting up and administering such a system?
>From a purely technical perspective, this sounds like it would evolve
into something resembling Usenet distribution. This may not be a bad thing.
Perhaps we could explore this avenue a bit?
--
Mark C. Langston Let your voice be heard:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA http://www.dnso.org
