[discuss] [IANAxfer] [ccnso-igrg] Two accountability questions - help pls- Workshop 23 - ICANN accountability
Milton L Mueller
mueller at syr.edu
Thu Sep 4 05:14:37 UTC 2014
John's case for a single IANA registry seems weak to me, especially when it touches on DNS.
> -----Original Message-----
> Bill -
> The IANA registries themselves are actually shared, e.g. the IPv4 space consists
> of technical/reserved entries from various IETF specifications, and then general
Please specify these entries.
> purpose IPv4 entries from the RIR system. These entries need to come together
> at publication into a single registry, and that's quite a bit easier if we're all using
> the same IANA registry operator.
> The same argument applies to DNS, in that
> portions of the DNS space are actually defined by IETF (e.g. ".arpa") and these
> entries have a different in origin than the general purpose portion of the DNS
> root zone.
Which is why they are easily separable. .arpa is just a TLD registry. It does not need to be run by the same entity that runs the DNS root zone any more than .com or .music needs to be run by the IANA.
> Despite that, the entire DNS root zone needs to be published as a single unit
> (particularly when one considers DNSSEC, etc.)
> There's no clear benefit from having discrete operators, and it
> would require some very significant joint coordination to make work as
> successfully as the present approach.
The potential benefit might be that the highly politicized and commercialized DNS-related activities would be separate from the other stuff, which is less controversial.
More information about the discuss