[discuss] So-called alternate roots (was: Funding for developing economies as an Ig policy issue? was Re:[ ] Time to be ...)

Sat Jan 4 00:50:52 UTC 2014

while andrew is correct from a protocol perspective,  ICANN has, over the years done a neat trick, called the registry/registrar split.  Most everyone was forced into this structure, until recently (last year)
when ICANN allowed a single organization to (once again) be both the registry and registrar for a delegation.

Which is handy, since otherwise someone might ask to see if the registry/registrar model applied to the root zone.   

There is _zero_ reason, from either a protocol or technical level why this would not or should not work.

e.g. let ICANN be the root registry, but be bared from being a root registrar….  !!!! 

/bill
Neca eos omnes.  Deus suos agnoscet.

On 3January2014Friday, at 14:45, Michel Gauthier <mg at telepresse.com> wrote:

> At 00:01 03/01/2014, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 11:19:30PM +0100, Michel Gauthier wrote:
>> > ICANN ICP-3 multi-root competition?
>> 
>> If I may ask, what does it even possibly mean to talk of "multi-root"?
> 
> I am not a specialist Iike you. I just trust the people in charge and use their words and expertise.
> 
> The people in charge (ICANN) state the "policy currently followed in administering the authoritative root of the Domain Name System" "provides a facility for future extensions that accommodates the possibility of safely deploying multiple roots on the public Internet" as "ultimately there may be better architectures for getting the job done where the need for a single, authoritative root will not be an issue".
> 
> http://www.icann.org/en/about/unique-authoritative-root
> 
> Best regards.
> MG 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss