Because of the enormous amount of interest in eDNS and the rapid growth of Registration Authorities (RAs) and TLD Registries under the eDNS plan, a temporary Freeze has been placed on the eDNS Root Zone [1]. This Freeze should allow all of the major Root Name Server Confederations to come to a round table consensus with "dot" clearly in the center of the table, out of reach of everyone's arms, military or otherwise. The major Root Name Server Confederations at this point in time are: AlterNIC - ?? Servers eDNS - 5 Servers (FROZEN) InterNIC - 9 Legacy Servers name.space - 12 Servers NSI/ISI - 4 Servers Everyone, especially ISPs and NANOG members, should encourage the owner/operators of the Root Name Servers in the above Confederations to represent them at these historic round table discussions which will be largely held in the open environment of the Internet and in traditional Internet forums. Think global and act local... =============== The consensus needed covers... 1. What are the confederations common guidelines on name syntax ? - One letter TLDs ? - Two letter TLDs ? - Dashes ? - Plurals ? 2. How will the confederations be "synced" ? (i.e. How will they exchange info on which TLDs they support ?) 3. Once a Confederation agrees to recogize a TLD will all Confederations agree to use the same TLD Name Server referrral NS Resource Records ? =============== I think that we should also add that there are CURRENTLY five parties at the Confederation Round Table. (AlterNIC, eDNS, InterNIC, name.space, NSI/ISI) There are clearly more Confederations coming. Consensus on the above basic issues is needed before the Root Name Server Confederation round table grows larger. [1] =========================================== ---------- From: edns-root@MCS.Net[SMTP:edns-root@MCS.Net] Sent: Saturday, May 03, 1997 11:14 AM To: edns-operators@MCS.Net Cc: edns-discuss@MCS.Net; newdom@ar.com Subject: Violations of Charter Over the last couple of weeks, eDNS has been grappling with apparent unfair practices with regards to TLD allocation and Registration Authority (RA) supervision. In an attempt to fairly address these issues, a Root Server Council (RSC) was formed for the sole purpose of interpreting the existing eDNS Charter. On Wednesday, the RSC issued a list of RAs and TLDs that appeared to be deficient in adhering to the letter and spirit of the Charter. Since that time, one RA has challanged the basis for this summary. Since these are difficult decisions and it is often hard to decide where to draw the line, the RSC felt that it would be better to decide these issues using a substantial public comment process from all Internet stakeholders, not just the RSC or other parties involved in eDNS. For these reasons, the RSC today has decided the following: - As of today, the RSC will place a temporary moratorium on the issuance of any new TLDs, RAs, or Registries. The only activity that will be approved are owner submitted Deletes, and Modifies required for system integretity. - The difficult questions facing the RSC will be brought before the entire Internet community for public review. Upon consensus, the questionable RAs and TLDs will either be deleted, modified, or accepted. - This process is to begin with Indusrty stakeholders at the upcoming Interop Conference in Las Vegas. The RSC also plans to request a meeting with the U.S. Government on this topic, as well as seek input from Internet and International organizations and Governments. Additional comments will be released before the upcoming Interop BOF (Birds of a Feather) Meeting schedule for Tuesday, May 6th at 8:00 p.m. The entire Internet community is invited to participate in this public comment process to help shape the future direction of eDNS. RSC. Regards, Jay Fenello President, Iperdome, Inc. 404-250-3242 http://www.iperdome.com ===============================================
Hi. I'm a root name server operator. Jim Fleming wrote:
Everyone, especially ISPs and NANOG members, should encourage the owner/operators of the Root Name Servers in the above Confederations to represent them at these historic round table discussions which will be largely held in the open environment of the Internet and in traditional Internet forums.
I take my root zone from the IANA. Not NSI and especially not from stargate 0.
On Sat, May 03, 1997 at 04:42:51PM -0700, Paul A Vixie wrote:
Hi. I'm a root name server operator. Jim Fleming wrote:
Everyone, especially ISPs and NANOG members, should encourage the owner/operators of the Root Name Servers in the above Confederations to represent them at these historic round table discussions which will be largely held in the open environment of the Internet and in traditional Internet forums.
I take my root zone from the IANA. Not NSI and especially not from stargate 0.
Really? Explain this trace please. traceroute to a.root-servers.net (198.41.0.4), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 Loop-Core1-TX12-0.mcs.net (192.160.127.110) 1.346 ms 1.068 ms 0.994 ms 2 mcsnet-gw.chicago.good.net (207.98.189.129) 1.753 ms 1.878 ms 1.755 ms 3 vienna.good.net (207.98.128.3) 19.578 ms 20.570 ms 26.779 ms 4 maeeast.bbnplanet.net (192.41.177.1) 25.668 ms 27.683 ms 26.536 ms 5 collegepk-br1.bbnplanet.net (4.0.1.17) 32.997 ms 34.288 ms 28.389 ms 6 collegepk-cr3.bbnplanet.net (128.167.253.1) 25.785 ms 28.684 ms 27.843 ms 7 netsol.bbnplanet.net (192.221.77.130) 31.580 ms 33.831 ms 29.229 ms 8 * * a.root-servers.net (198.41.0.4) 44.905 ms netsol.bbnplanet.net is Network Solutions, Inc., otherwise known as NSI. InterNIC Registration (INTERNIC-BLK) INTERNIC-BLK1 198.0.0.0 - 198.255.255.0 Network Solutions, Inc. (NETBLK-INTERNIC) NETBLK-INTERNIC 198.41.0.0 - 198.41.2.0 Network Solutions, Inc. (NET-INTERNIC1) INTERNIC1 198.41.0.0 - 198.41.3.0 Nice try. -- -- Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, http://www.mcs.net/ Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| NOW Serving 56kbps DIGITAL on our analog lines! Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Well, heck. Karl sent me the same thing personally since he must have figured my slocal would nuke his messages on the main nanog list. I've removed my slocal for the duration of various other emergencies, so I got the pleasure of seeing this twice.
I take my root zone from the IANA. Not NSI and especially not from stargate 0.
Really?
Yes, really.
Explain this trace please. ... 7 netsol.bbnplanet.net (192.221.77.130) 31.580 ms 33.831 ms 29.229 ms 8 * * a.root-servers.net (198.41.0.4) 44.905 ms
netsol.bbnplanet.net is Network Solutions, Inc., otherwise known as NSI.
Yes, that's true. I think you interpreted that trace correctly. Exactly why do you need my help?
Nice try.
Um. I don't know a lot of smaller words I could use to explain this but I will try. If IANA tells me to take my root zone from Stargate 0, then I will. What that trace is telling you is that a long while back, IANA asked the InterNIC contractor (currently NSI) as well as the root name server operators to publish its root zone. We all decided that since InterNIC publishes the COM, EDU, MIL, NET, ORG, ARPA, and GOV zones to the other root name servers, we might as well publish the "." zone the same way. Authority to make changes to MIL, GOV, EDU, and "." was not delegated to the InterNIC contractor. Last week the MIL folks let us all know that they will be publishing the zone directly soon, for example. Authority to make changes to COM, NET, ORG, and IN-ADDR.ARPA _was_ delegated to the InterNIC contractor. However, IN-ADDR.ARPA is itself subdelegated to APNIC, RIPE, and soon ARIN -- when the InterNIC contractor stops allocating IP address blocks it will also cease to have authority to make changes in IN-ADDR.ARPA. So you see, the top level domains published by the target of your traceroute are not all owned by the organization who owns that target. When the owners of these domains say "change where you pull it from", the root name server operators do so during their next scheduled maintainance interval. The "." zone is owned by IANA. If the IANA tells us to fetch it from Stargate 9, we will do that -- it makes no difference to us where we fetch it from. We are just server operators, we're just concerned about stuff like connectivity and uptime and coherence. Jim Fleming's so called "Root Server Council" is an insult to our intelligence.
participants (3)
-
Jim Fleming
-
Karl Denninger
-
Paul A Vixie