On 19:10 30/07/02, Randy Bush said:
to paraphrase your good friend john klensin,
jon postel consciously pushed problems back to the locale and
attempted to not involve the iana in controversy and argument.
Randy,
Jon Postel managed the ".arpa" system for which the DNS was designed with
"other systems" interconnect in mind (cf. RFC 921) and their own roots.
the icann seems to be willing to take on any task, and will
invent controversy and argument is none is immediately available
to hand.
ICANN manages the world.
ICANN is not interested in network inftrastucture but in building
structural relations.
Just search the ERC propositions for "root", "DNS" ...
it is the latter approach which has led to the need for a staff
of dozens to perform the wortk that used to be done better and
far less controversially by one computer scientist in part time.
This only says why lawyers are paid so much, in proportion to their
inneffiency when compared with a computer scientists :-)
As indicated IMHO the conlusion of this "forests have one tree" thread is
the need for a clean sheet analysis of the requirements for the DNS.2
specs. With a cross namespace, cross technology, real life universal URL
support service in mind.
jfc
randy
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.380 / Virus Database: 213 - Release Date: 24/07/02