[CCWG-ACCT] DNS

[James Gannon]

I don’t want to seem blunt but this it literally the core concept of how the internet was designed. 

Whatever we can say about the CCWG exceeding its remit in other areas I certainly don’t think we can start questioning core principles of how the internet is designed.

-James




On 19/04/2016, 7:08 a.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on behalf of Kavouss Arasteh" <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on behalf of kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:

>Dear Andrew
>Dear steve
>Once again I am grateful for your very detailed reply but I am still remained unconvinced that there is no coordinated actions on delegation of Name.
>I an surprised that people push to maintain such disintegrated spread activities
>Regards
>Kavouss
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 18 Apr 2016, at 15:13, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 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
>_______________________________________________
>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community