[CCWG-ACCT] DNS

[Seun Ojedeji]

Yeah that's correct but the fact that ICANN could redelegate .info (due to
her control of the root) could imply some level of coordination (though not
necessarily allocation).

Something to relate with is the RIR LIR where the RIR does not really care
what prefix you allocate in your "assigned/leased" prefix but could
withdraw your entire allocation if you fail on your sub-allocation policy
requirements. In that instance we do still say RIR has coordination role in
their region.

Cheers!

Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 17 Apr 2016 5:30 p.m., "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:

> Hi Kavouss,
>
> I cut the cc: list down a little.  Hope that's ok.
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 11:51:13PM +0200, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
> > If ICANN does not coordinate the allocation and assignments of names in
> the
> > domain name system then who does that?
> > What is the situations today, who perform that task?
>
> I tried to answer this in the chat today, but I was apparently
> unsuccessful.  Let me try again here.
>
> The answer is, "Nobody does that."  There is no central co-ordination
> of allocation and assignment of names in the DNS.  That is in fact the
> genius of the design of the DNS.
>
> The DNS is possibly the most successful distributed database ever.  It
> is distributed in two ways, which might be called data maintenance and
> data query operation.  The "data query operation" is caching, which
> allows the DNS to perform very well; it's not relevant to our
> discussion.  The "data maintenance", however, is fundamental to the
> model of the operation of the system, and is how DNS has managed to
> thrive.
>
> At every dot in a domain name, it is possible to add a "zone cut": a
> place where a new operator can take over a piece of the domain name
> space.  The process of making a zone cut is called "delegation", and
> it involved putting name server resource record(s) on the parent side
> and "apex" records -- the same name server resource record(s) plus a
> Start Of Authority (SOA) record -- on the child side.  So, for
> instance, Afilias delegates yitter.info to me, so in my zone there is
> an SOA record at yitter.info.  What that means is that Afilias is no
> longer responsible for things that happen underneath yitter.info
> (because I have the authority -- that's what the SOA means).
>
> This means that wherever there is a zone cut, there's also an end of
> the co-ordinator function (in a strict sense of controlling names).
> Afilias is responsible to co-ordinate everything under info _except_
> below the stuff they delegated away (like yitter.info).  Verisign is
> responsible to co-ordinate everything under com except below that
> which they delegated away (like anvilwalrusden.com).  CIRA is
> responsible to co-ordinate everything under ca except below that which
> they delegated away (like crankycanuck.ca).  And finally, ICANN is
> responsible to co-ordinate everything under the root zone (which is
> represented as ".") except below that which they delegated away (like
> com, net, org, info, ca, and so on).
>
> Now, operators who delegate away parts of the name space can make
> rules about what conditions they impose for the delegation.  CIRA, for
> instance, won't delegate anything in ca unless you're a Canadian
> citizen or are in Canada.  (I happen to be a citizen, so I get to
> register and maintain crankycanuck.ca.  I'm also cranky, but that was
> not a condition for my registration.)  You might say that ICANN uses
> its consensus policies as this sort of condition.
>
> So why, you might ask, isn't this all centrally co-ordinated?  Well,
> because it makes things work better.  The Internet is a massively
> distributed thing.  It would be bureaucratic and inflexible if every
> time I wanted to add a new computer in anvilwalrusden.com I had to
> talk to ICANN or Verisign.  But I don't need to talk to anybody,
> because the name space is delegated to me.  That means I can operate
> my thing without anybody else being bothered.  This make operation of
> the Internet simpler, cheaper, and faster than it otherwise would be.
> And I can even give a chunk of my namespace to someone else -- I could
> create shaveaukroasts.anvilwalrusden.com[1] and give it to a friend
> and colleague, and I wouldn't need to tell anyone in particular
> (though I'd still have to tell literally everyone, by putting it in
> the DNS).
>
> This lack of central co-ordination is one reason the DNS has been so
> successful.  I hope that explanation helps.  If you have further
> questions about this, feel free to ask me more.
>
> Best regards,
>
> A
>
> [1] anvilwalrusden is an anagram of "Andrew Sullivan".  I will leave
> as an exercise for the reader the anagram of "shaveaukroasts".
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160418/4c47f96c/attachment-0001.html>