<html>
<body>
At 10:56 04/03/2014, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I '+1' every one of David's
comments.</blockquote><br>
This is an exciting things. A fundamental disagreement has arized
between the grand parents, parents and childs (cf.Bill Manning). Who is
authoritative on the children's life?<br><br>
From what is being said on this list everyone agrees that:<br><br>
- parents (ICANN and IANA) can born new childs (TLDs) if the approval of
grand parents (NTIA and USG).<br>
- grand-parents make sure that parents raise their children correctly
(they keep the root in turne with their demands)<br>
- childs do what they want (if they do not bother to ask the parents)
they declare their own additional nameservers.<br><br>
We can observe that there are two attitudes:<br><br>
1. ICANNers who thinks this is fine, want to practice birth control in
enlarging the family, consider that Telcos "are in the family"
(Fadi Chehade), and in some way the neigbhours contesting the family
governance style, should be associated (globalization).<br><br>
2. the childs' friends who start thinking the kids have come of age, and
contest the grand-parents' care as oppressing, and the parents attitude
as oppressive.<br><br>
The two attitudes blatantly reflect in terminology: the use of the most
common words are opposed as being an emmancipation attempt. There are
"family correct terms" and forbidden matters.<br><br>
An analysis of common sense would lead me to conclude a "sickness of
youth", a "collective crisis of adolescence". While
socially disturbing, wa all know it is going to self-organize in the bad
or good way things usually do: by maturity of all the involved parties.
But after how many mutual vituperations? We are all familiar of this kind
of stituation we hower always repeat from age to age, in every situation,
for everything. After a while, negentropy becomes entropic.<br><br>
M G<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 7:20 AM,
David Conrad
<<a href="mailto:drc@virtualized.org">drc@virtualized.org</a>>
wrote:
<dl>
<dd>Elisabeth<br>
<dd>On Mar 4, 2014, at 2:42 AM, Elisabeth Blanconil
<<a href="mailto:info@vgnic.org">info@vgnic.org</a>> wrote:
<dd>> At 02:45 04/03/2014, nathalie coupet wrote:
<dd>>> Could you, jefsey, Hebe, and others, please address the
issue of leakage. How could you prevent it (do you want to prevent it)?
<dd>>
<dd>> As David Conrad mentions it, the leakage is a pollution of DNS
buffers by a different vision of the name space. This would occur in the
top zone if there were two different identical TLDs, the zones of which
would be different, documented by two different root server systems of
thee same class.<br>
<dd>No. "Pollution" (or perhaps more descriptively
cross-contamination) would occur in caching servers (and applications
that implemented their own resolvers like, say, most web browsers) when
they queried the name servers that offered the different
namespaces. The end result, particularly for end users who have no
idea what the DNS actually is, would be that it would be impossible to
tell what a particular name pointed to at any given time. That is,
when you sit down at a coffee shop and try to browse
"<a href="http://www.example.com">www.example.com</a>" you
could get something _completely unrelated_ to what you get when you
browse "<a href="http://www.example.com">www.example.com</a>"
from your home. Worse, the end user _has no way to figure out which
<a href="http://example.com">example.com</a> she is going to go to_.<br>
<dd>> Please note that:
<dd>> * The ICANN root is authoritative: the NTIA decides which
servers are to be listed for the different TLDs.<br><br>
<dd>Please stop spreading blatant and obvious misinformation. It is
not helping the discussion.<br>
<dd>NTIA does NOT decide which servers are listed for TLDs. The TLD
administrators decide this. NTIA ensures that ICANN follows its processes
when proposing changes initiated by the TLD administrators.<br>
<dd>> * The ORSN root is non-authoritative: it reports the
configuration authoritatively indicated by the TLD Managers.<br>
<dd>You are using the DNS term of art "non-authoritative"
wrong. Both ORSN and the normal root servers run authoritative
servers and respond authoritatively to queries for the root zone.<br>
<dd>> it reports the configuration authoritatively indicated by the
TLD Managers.<br>
<dd>As does the normal root servers.<br>
<dd>ORSN, by serving the root zone data generated by the existing root
zone partners, does _NOTHING_ different that the normal root
servers. The only practical difference between ORSN and the normal
root servers is the ORSN infrastructure is currently far weaker/less
diverse than the existing root servers.<br>
<dd>> This is the difference between monarchy and polycracy<br>
<dd>This is pure fantasy.<br>
<dd>> In a non-attacked class,<br>
<dd>No idea what you mean by this.<br>
<dd>> leaks can only happen if an authoritative root administrator
decides the seizure of TLD.<br>
<dd>No. Really. Just No. If you actually believe this, you clearly
do not understand the technology.<br>
<dd>Imagine your coffee shop decides to use an alternative
namespace. Since very few people know/care about this alternative
namespace, there are very few names in it. Every time you try to go
to something like Facebook, Amazon, Tmall, Maktoob, etc., you get
"name does not exist" (NXDOMAIN) errors. Frustrated, you go
home. However, because DNS responses are cached, when you connect to your
home network and try to go to any of those names, you _still_ get
"name does not exist". This is just one of the many forms of
leakage (I described another form above).<br>
<dd>It would be extremely helpful if you would stop attempting to confuse
people.<br>
<dd>> VGNICs reduce the risks from this happening.<br>
<dd>Since I am still unclear as to what "VGNICs" are, I'll take
your word on this.<br>
<dd>> The DNS IETF model supports 65,365 roots, one for each class.
The sole class that people discuss on this list is the "IN"
ICANN/NTIA class. We call this attitude "the BUG", i.e. being
unipolarly global.<br>
<dd>I fail to see the value in attempting to redefine common terms.
For an actual definition of the term "bug", see
<a href="http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Science/Grace%20Hooper.html">
http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Science/Grace%20Hooper.html</a><br>
<dd>Regards,
<dd>-drc<br>
<br>
<dd>_______________________________________________
<dd>discuss mailing list
<dd><a href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a>
<dd>
<a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" eudora="autourl">
http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br><br>
</dl><br><br>
<br>
-- <br>
--<br>
=========================<br>
Carlos M. Martinez-Cagnazzo<br>
<a href="http://cagnazzo.name">h</a>ttp://<a href="http://cagnazzo.me">
cagnazzo.me</a><br>
=========================<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
discuss@1net.org<br>
<a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" eudora="autourl">
http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></blockquote></body>
</html>