The US DoC operates, directly or indirectly, 6 of the 13 root servers,
including A. Whether it is "right" or not is irrelevant -- the DoC has
the power to do whatever it wants to the root.
we REALLY need to rectify that situation. perhaps what we need are large
numbers of alternate roots that DON'T try to define new TLDs but which
exist solely to prevent the US government from exerting control...
Let's not forget you wouldn't have an Internet without the US Govt.
the way it happened, the US Gov't played a fundamental role. but
something like the Internet would have happened anyway because all
of the pieces were in place. without the US Government projects
it might have taken longer for some technology to emerge as the
leader. but there were other similar technologies being developed
elsewhere. something like the Internet was bound to happen.
As much as everyone loves bashing the US Govt, I don't see anything the DoC
has done which wasn't in the interests of the Internet community.
if they'd been acting in the Internet community's interests then NSI
would have lost control of the root years ago.
I think we can all imagine how things would look if we handed the root
over to ISO, or the ITU, or the UN, or some other similarly "qualified"
international organization.
It's not difficult to imagine a better result from say ITU than the current
ICANN. And I don't say that out of admiration for ITU...
I was supportive of the idea of ICANN, and I still support ICANN reform
as the most likely way of solving the current set of problems - not that
I see any sign of such reform happening. But ICANN has still been a huge
disappointment, and at this point I think it will be very difficult for
ICANN to gain the trust that it needs in order to work effectively.
Of course part of the disappointment comes from ICANN's having to deal with
the organizational structure that was forced on it. And that is are largely
due to efforts and influence of the US Government. Such influence was
hardly in the interest of Internet users.
Keith