Simon Hackett wrote:
> 
> >- According to AURSC, 20 million internet users can already access to
> >our alternate DNS.
> 
> Prove it.

See Jeff's posting about that...

> And presumes that your confederation is somehow 'more worthy' for the world
> to use and rely on for critical DNS resolution functions than the existing
> root servers, and presumes that your confereration is the only such
> confederation - because any other, parallel, confederation which created a
> TLD identical to one in your private universe would set up an un-resolvable
> contradiction between your intersts and the interests of that other
> confederation.
> 
> Conistently ignoring these issues is what makes you look silly.

We don't oppose to other RSCs. We offer them to link our servers to
theirs, sharing data, under minimal stability conditions.

> Because it's not a question of whether it works or not. Technically, it'll
> work (although it is likely to fail to scale if you actually get what you
> seem to want, lots of users - how were you going to fund properly
> provisioned root server sites, by the way?)
> 
> The real problem is that logically, and rationally, it's a stupid thing to
> be doing, just to pander to your egos in supporting your creation of new
> TLD's with no rational process to back up their creation and maintenance.
> It's not a technical issue at its 'root'. It is one of a strange misuse of
> ego-mania.

Mmm. Don't know this 'ego' you're talking about. Could you do
introductions ? :o)
Seriously : the system we propose is exactly the opposite of what you
described. 

> 
> Look, if I set up a new fake root nameserver (which is all you are doing)
> and put .POKEY into it, containing entries that suit me, will YOU link to
> it, will you add it into your confederation?

If .POKEY didn't already exist in our DNS, we could do it, if you meet
the tech requirements...

> 
> Now - note that .POKEY already exists in your private conferated universe.
> Does that modify your answer to the preceeding question?

No : before be delegated an IRSC/IPv8 TLD, you must contact participants
(maybe you future neighbor nets ?), and propose your application. After
discussion, wether your proposed TLD already exists or not, there'll be
a solution...

> 
> If you won't, why won't you - why am I less worthy that you are?

You have to prove your worthyness to other participants in your neighbor
net : efficiently manage your name space, participating in decision
discussions, etc.

> 
> >As some people from this list pointed it, we could have "created" TLDs
> >on a whim, for jokes, or anything else : but we didn't.
> 
> Oh yes, you did - .POKEY is the signature example of precisely this being
> done. And Adam is even *proud* of it (check his AURSC web site). I'm sure
> you'll remove some in the future on just such a whim as well.

If you can't see http://www.pokey , try http://www.pokey.org
You'll see it's not a joke, and you, as everybody on the Net, are
concerned by that...

> 
> >
> >All TLDs are administered/created/replaced under consensus with
> >"neighbor nets" partners. Uncentral administration, as the Internet as a
> >whole should be managed, on a bottom-up basis...
> >
> 
> It can be, with ONE SINGLE EXCEPTION, which is the root servers. And they
> HAVE to be centrally managed in terms of decision making processes, because
> although user expansion of the DNS tree happens at the leaves, all DNS
> accesses originate from the root of the tree, and it has to be the same
> tree, so that everything works as it should.

Bad : a disruption of the central root server would kill all the system
(july '97)...

> 
> Precisely who (real people, email addresses etc pls) manage the process of
> that "consensus" ?How were they chosen? How are they removed if they
> misbehave? What is their code of conduct and where is it documented?

You should ask Adam, for AURSC, or Jim.
As soon as there's an open discussion process, I think "code of conduct"
are more or less implicit...

> 
> It's impossible not to know about Adam Todd (to readers of this list at
> least), but precisely who else *is* the AURSC? I didn't vote for 'em...

From a several thousand kilometers distance, I'm not the best qualified
to answer. 

All I know, is that EURSC and AURSC servers are well tuned, under
IRSC...

Perhaps, you should accept the NDA proposed by Adam, and get the info
you want.

> 
> ...S

Best regards,

> ---
> Simon Hackett, Technical Director, Internode Systems Pty Ltd
> 31 York St [PO Box 284, Rundle Mall], Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
> Email: simon§internode.com.au  Web: http://www.on.net
> Phone: +61-8-8223-2999          Fax: +61-8-8223-1777

-- 
Jean-Christophe PRAUD - LUDEXPRESS  http://www.ludexpress.com
http://www.nicwine.net     http://www.nic.wine     3:213 WINE
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu n'gah Bill R'lyeh Wgah'nagl fhtagn