Re: [ga] Re: "Alternative roots": a big technical failure
On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> <URL:http://www.orsn.net/>.
Thanks for the pointer - their set of servers and concern for the
data that those servers deliver seems quite reasonable.
And you are right, ORSC has been rather lax. I did not encounter the
problem with ORSC/.org that you did - I could have, it was just my good
luck. The lax processes of ORSC contrast poorly against the very solid
processes of the root-servers.org (i.e. the legacy/primary) group of root
servers. That is not so much a stake in the heart of competing roots as
it is a demonstration that quality of operations between the competing
systems may vary. What is good is that users (or their ISP's) have the
ability to chose and to switch, as you did.
> At first, I noticed two *mandatory* things that were missing in ORSC
> but present in ORSN:
ORSN doesn't support the expanded set of TLDs, it is effectively a mirror
of the ICANN/NTIA root zone. This is fine for most folks. It does make
it hard for those of us who use the expanded set of TLDs (like .ewe.)
But that's our choice and we have to live with the consequences.
> 2) A public monitoring system (something that is also missing in
ICANN/USG,
I proposed a DNS root monitoring system to ICANN on my very first day on
the board way back in year 2000. The response was nil, i.e. no interest
was expressed either by the board as a body, board members as individuals,
or ICANN's "staff". ICANN's institutional lack of interest in having
means to ascertain whether the DNS is operating well or failing was quite
clearly expressed.
--karl--