From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Jan 26 17: 1:49 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C405737B401 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 17:01:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from ntl.com (pc1-glfd2-4-cust59.glfd.cable.ntl.com [81.99.187.59]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9420543E4A for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 17:01:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from william@palfreman.com) Received: from aqua.lan.palfreman.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ntl.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h0R12ukn014551; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 01:02:56 GMT (envelope-from william@palfreman.com) Received: from localhost (william@localhost) by aqua.lan.palfreman.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) with ESMTP id h0R12tgP014548; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 01:02:55 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: aqua.lan.palfreman.com: william owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 01:02:55 +0000 (GMT) From: William Palfreman To: Barney Wolff Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 4.7-R-p3: j.root-servers.net In-Reply-To: <20030126230257.GA62541@pit.databus.com> Message-ID: <20030127004815.Y10725@aqua.lan.palfreman.com> References: <20030126130837.GA399@gicco.homeip.net> <20030126224956.K27492-100000@voo.doo.net> <20030126230257.GA62541@pit.databus.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 26 Jan 2003, Barney Wolff wrote: > And of course, using the "alternate" roots is evil. Why is that then? I'm slaving the OpenNIC ones here without any trouble. DNS just being an information service in the end I can't see why there has to be the only one of its type. In fact, how can it be a standard if there is only one implementation? :-) I can think of some very good reasons *to* have multiple roots, for one allowing new TLD domains to evolve spontaneously, and secondly to prevent TLD and subdomains from coming under control of oppressive governments and quasi-government agencies like ICANN. AFAIK .za had to move to the UK a while back precisely to avoid takeover by the South African government, but even so, one fixed root is bound to lead to increasing political control in the end. So what is the great theoretical objection to multiple roots then? -- W. Palfreman. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message