At 04:14 PM 3/13/2001 -0800, Mike Batchelor wrote:
That one root must be supported by a set ^zone of coordinated root servers administered by a unique naming authority. Here is where I disagree. ... I still say it's a self-serving statement with political motivations, and I hope I have adequately explained why I think that.
One could argue that "single naming authority" does not necessarily imply that a single body is making the decisions of what is or is not in the root zone. The use of a single body is (arguably) the _easiest_ solution to the root zone edit control problem, not necessarily the best solution. Clearly, a model in which multiple cooperative bodies manage the editing of the root zone is workable -- there are several empirical proofs of such. However, it can be argued that in such a model, the cooperative is the "unique naming authority". The issue isn't really about this however. New.Net is not a part of a cooperative. They are a commercial company deciding on their own what is or is not a good top level domain -- they are asserting (with the help of @Home, Earthlink, mp3.com, etc.) that they are the unique naming authority. I, for one, do not believe that this is appropriate or desirable. Rgds, -drc