[discuss] Options for root zone (was Re: Interesting article)

[Peter Dengate Thrush]

Agreed

Regards

Peter Dengate Thrush

> On 16/01/2014, at 8:17 pm, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> If I may attempt a restatement of the issue….
> 
> As a technical analysis might put it: For at least some stakeholders, one requirement for a legitimate, trustworthy system of oversight for the contents of the root zone is that the US government (or, to generalize, any government) *can't* act in the way described. This requirement has not been met to date. 
> 
> We can stipulate that the US government *hasn't* acted in the way people fear. As a practical matter, and as already noted by others here, I think it would be extremely difficult and dangerous for the US government to do so. However, unless I've seriously misunderstood some previous discussion here, this practical limitation is not necessarily considered responsive to the requirement, or to the question of whether it's been met. 
> 
> I think the exact formulation of that requirement, and others we might be able to agree on for oversight of the contents of the root zone, is worth discussing. Wearing my "techie" hat, I'll say it's very helpful to have both the requirements analysis for the ideal system, and the analysis of how the system we actually have behaves in the real world. I hope we can do both.
> 
> 
> Suzanne
> 
>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Not the point Jorge - read the article linked below where this question is addressed in the opening paragraphs. It doesn't matter - the fact is,the control exists  and that is widely seen as problematic and unilateral control. ICANN will not be trusted internationally until this is fixed (and the suggestions in this article towards diplomatic immunity for the root zone would be one way to achieve this).
>> 
>> Ian Peter
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Jorge Amodio
>> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:22 PM
>> To: Ian Peter
>> Cc: Brian E Carpenter ; discuss at 1net.org
>> Subject: Re: [discuss] Options for root zone (was Re: Interesting article)
>> 
>> 
>> Under the current architecture and state of affairs tell me at least one instance in the 30+ years of existence of the DNS where the USG has used or threaten to use it's alleged "control" of the root zone.
>> 
>> -Jorge
>> 
>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 3:30 AM, "Ian Peter" <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Brian wrote
>>> 
>>>> If I could have three wishes, the first
>>> two would be unconditional cancellation of the NTIA
>>> contract and relocation of ICANN's seat to Geneva.
>>> 
>>> Yep, I'll take the first two as well and for my third wish I'll have another 3 wishes to use up later as we progress.
>>> 
>>> Here is a good paper outlining some possibilities for achieving guaranteed independence for the root zone. well worth reading and discussing as a way forward
>>> 
>>> http://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/international-inviolability-root-zone
>>> 
>>> Ian Peter
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss