>Is ``legacy'' is meant as a joke or is this just lifted from some
>propaganda?  I'm not sure if I find it funny or derogatory (or both).

Legacy is the common term applied to these servers now.  It's recognised by
the USG also.  In fact NFS applied the term after much debate as to what to
call them.

>It has ``a cooperative agreement from the National Science Foundation
>to provide registration services for the Internet community''.  Its

You neglect to mention the Ramp down period and the NFS hand over on
September 30 by even IANA to the NFS of all servers and data.

Hmmm.

>] 2. .AU and its subdomains
>
>The IANA has delegated responsibility for .AU to Robert Elz (kre).

>Net.au is delegated to Hugh Irvine (who has an arrangement with
>connect.com.au to operate the net.au domain, perhaps a little bit
>like the IANA/NSI relationship above for the root servers), and

Not really. There is little relationship between IANA and NSI.

>Melbourne IT run the operations for the com.au registry (under a
>non-exclusive license from kre).  It is not clear to me whether kre
>or Melbourne IT is currently the delegated authority for com.au
>(in the sense that Hugh Irvine is the delegated authority for net.au,
>that is the person with ultimate authority to change policy, and the
>right to choose who looks after operations).

If Huge is the ultimate authority, why then does all the literature place
the onus on Connect Com Au?

>At this stage, ADNA is not the delegated authority for anything.

Very true.

>] 3. the alternative domain spaces
>
>I don't know a lot about this area, except that alternative domain spaces
>are not recognised by the IANA, and therefore in my view are not official
>domains for general public use on The Internet.

This isn't true at all.  IANA recognises the seven selected gTLD os the
IAHC, which of course IANA and Crocker created.

If IANA recognises these, not even loaded on a server, TLDs, it has no
reason not to recognise the other claims and TLDs. In fact IANA has
accepted payment for other TLDs.

>Of course anyone who wants to is free to set up their own domain, and
>to agree with other people (generally on a case-by-case basis) to
>use that domain name, at least presuming it is not in use for some
>officially recognised domain name.  Like private IP address space
>(eg: RFC 1918, 192.168.*.*).

Yes, this is correct.  Right now, there is a major effort to ensure there
are no conflicts in these other TLDs.  A lot of research by a huge number
of peope with interests from Bottom Line Commercial to Internet Spirit are
trying hard to gather all the hidden TLDs that are about.

Like 'dot' itself.  Run by BOFH.

>As long as all ISPs recognise that domains granted through a hierarchy
>leading back to the IANA at the top are valid, then DNS customers can
>expect other people on the Internet to be able to resolve their domain
>as long as it was approved through this chain of authority back to IANA.

Of course any TLDs not loaded ito the IANA servers won't work.

>Of course some ISPs may choose to recognise other hierarchies as well.

Yes, ISPs may choose to extend their coverage by using the Alternatives.
Bit like buying a car.  You can choose which brand you want.  Only in this
case, some RSC's are free.