[CCWG-ACCT] DNS

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Andrew
That was just a quarry and not suggestion
Tks for your kind explanation again.
Regards
Kavouss

2016-04-18 15:13 GMT+02:00 Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>:

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:01:05AM +0200, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>
> > Should there be a need to make ICANN responsible for an overall policy
> under which those individual entities coordinate the allocation and
> assignments of Names  in the Domain Name System or not?
>
> Not only do I not think there should be a need, I don't think there
> should even be a desire.  The DNS is designed not to have that single
> policy or any such sort of global rule.  It would be contrary to the
> technical reality of the DNS to try to make such a rule.
>
> RFC 2181 points out quite clearly (even more clearly than RFC 1034 --
> see 2181 section 11) that names in the DNS have only restrictions
> about length.  People have already implemented things that depend on
> that lack of restriction.  Mostly, those implementations have been out
> in the "leaf nodes", because the hierarchical nature of the DNS makes
> that the wisest place to do such things.  (Compare this reasoning with
> the IAB's guidance on internationalized labels -- see RFC 6912.)
>
> Everything we have ever learned about operations on the Internet tells
> us that centralised authority doesn't work.  There's no reason to
> suppose this case is any different.  The DNS was designed to dispose
> of a point of centralisation in the Internet -- one that caused real
> operational problems.  It would be a massive retrograde step to try to
> re-impose such administrative centralisation again.
>
> Best regards,
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160418/9f718395/attachment.html>