[ALAC] [At-Large] Review of the DNS Root Server Advisory Committee

[Evan Leibovitch]

Karl Auerbach wrote:
> There is much history here - the root server operators, or rather the 
> operators of the primary system of root servers (there are other 
> systems of root servers) have never pledged allegiance to ICANN.  
> Rather they run their systems as their own systems, set their own 
> rules, adopt their own procedures.
>
> In a way this has been good because those folks who are doing this 
> have done a spectacular job.
I appreciate the history but am trying to understand how it guides the 
present situation. Westlake wants ICANN (and its various constituencies) 
far more deeply involved in the root servers -- yet your history 
suggests that their independence has served RSAC well.

It is reasonable than an ICANN that would be involved with TLDs and IPV6 
would also have a hand in the root servers. But based on what you and 
others have said, it seems like Westlake is recommending substantial 
repair to something that isn't broken. Furthermore, ICANN -- including 
ALAC -- have little to teach RSAC about transparency and accountability.

> But on the other hand, there needs to be some formality of obligation. 
> There needs to be some constraint that keeps the root server operators 
> from giving into financial pressures and doing bad things.

So... what is the useful recommendation moving forward? Is the status 
quo not a viable option, considering the difficulty with which any 
worthy changes would be implemented? Given to their own processes, Karl 
describes that, when confronted with challenges, the RSAC has tended to 
do the right thing. Is that only by chance? Or perhaps... in their 
opacity they have developed a reasonable process for good judgement.

Indeed, based on what's been said maybe RSAC has something to teach 
ICANN as well.

- Evan