No William, we are talking about multiple roots, NOT separate namespaces. There is one namespace. There cannot be collisions. Inclusive roots do not create collisions - only ICANN has done that so far. There are people who have a great disagreement about how ICANN is going about its business. There is a large piece of the world that doesn't want ICANN to be the authority. No public RSN that cares about its credibility will create collisions. ----- Original Message ----- From: "william(at)elan.net" <william@elan.net> To: "John Palmer (NANOG Acct)" <nanog@adns.net> Cc: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 2:05 PM Subject: Re: The whole alternate-root ${STATE}horse
On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote:
Repeat after me - COLLISIONS ARE BAD! We all agree with that.
But you can't avoid collisions with multiple namespaces. This is exactly why Internet needs IANA - to avoid collisions in TLD names, used ip addresses, protocol parameters, etc.
What you're doing with separate namespace is as if you took some part of the currently unused IP space and setup your own BGP peering network for those using that space with your own registry, but also accepted routes from Intenet peers on the same router mixing it all up.
-- William Leibzon Elan Networks william@elan.net