Stef,
Would you provide some description of the history and practise of
IANA-related functions that are edge-controlled?
That is, when and where in the history of the Internet has protocol
parameter assignment, IP address allocation, or domain name registration
been anything except subject to a central authority?
I believe no such history or practise exists.
The power of the edge-vs-core model is that it forces one to pay attention
to trade-offs.
The danger of over-emphasizing edge-based implementation is that it ignores
the simple reality that you cannot have edges without a core.
>This is especially true for Protocols (IETF style) and DNS, where the
>main protocols that make the Internet work are in fact lodged in the
>computers on the edges of the net (IP/TCP-UDP/FTP-SMTP-HTTP-ETC) and
Unfortunately, the model is rather more complicated, since many edge
functions become core functions. The fact that one or another function is
at the 'edge' relative to some lower level services does not make the
functions any the less 'core' relative to end-users and overall system
usability.
That is, the system is multi-leveled and what is edge at one level may well
be core at another.
For example, the DNS is very much, now, a core function.
On the other hand, the edge/core concept is particularly powerful as a
means of introducing new core functions by virtue of an incremental
edge-adoption process.
>It is a fiction that the ROOT must be defined and controlled by a
>central authority, when the facts are that it can just as well be
It is a fiction that is without concrete contrary demonstration. To date,
no detailed specification has been put forward for another administrative
model. What we will find with specious approaches like that proposed by
the ORSC is that, ultimately, there is will be a central authority which
must, at least, resolve disputes. That sort of post-hoc resolution process
is every bit as 'centralized' as the pre-hoc approach taken in the model
used for the net, today. Except, of course, that it is far less efficient,
including the likelihood of dysfunction system operation.
If my assessment is incorrect, please show me a specification to the
contrary. One which has been run through a serious, open review process.
d/
ps. I've copied some ICANN folks because the mythology surrounding the
"open root" proposal is sufficiently tenacious and fuzzy that I'd like to
make sure they hear a bit about the inherent problem with the proposal.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker Tel: +60 (19) 3299 445
<mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com> Post Office Box 296, U.P.M.
Serdang, Selangor 43400 MALAYSIA
Brandenburg Consulting
<http://www.brandenburg.com> Tel: +1 (408) 246 8253
Fax: +1(408)273 6464 675 Spruce Dr., Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA