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

[Joe Baptista]

People please - stop with the bull shit.  This has been covered time and
time again.  The root server operators are a clan of 13 root operators who I
like to call the 113 ugly root sisters.  They perform a voluntary service to
the united states government - but have no contracts with any branch of the
united states government.

I would also include Bill Manning in the clan.  He used to run a root - but
stopped.  I think there is still some traffic to that root so I would
include him as a legacy root operator as well.  He could really screw them
up if he got angry.  But I digress.

In any case there just 13 fellows who we can consider the gods of the
Internet.  What they see the users of the Internet sees.  This however is
not a monopoly.  Just bad programming.  Since it is easy to relocate root
authority.

They as a group are ultimately the people who run the Internet - not ICANN.
They are not in any way accountable to anyone.  I think a handful have
contracts with ICANN.  Most do not.  So they are not accountable to anyone.

If the 13 ugly root sisters chose to elope and leave ICANN then ICANN is
finished.  Literally.  It won't come to that I'm sure, and if it does I
suspect it will be well deserved.  The people running these roots are
VeriSign, USC-ISI, Cogent, UMD, NASA-ARC, ISC, DOD-NIC, ARL, Autonomica,
RIPE, ICANN and WIDE.

To the root operators the RSSAC is an inconvenience they have been forced to
tolerate because of their connections to the U.S. Government.  The purpose
of the RSSAC is an attempt to seem accountable to the community.  Its not
either contractually or legally obligated.  But the RSSAC make it possible
for the root operators to make it look like they are - accountable.  The
usual ICANN smoke and mirror tricks abound.

One thing I am disappointed with is that there has never been an audit of
these root volunteers and what they do with the data they collect vis a vis
their queries.  Thats powerful intelligence for marketing and Intel.

cheers
joe baptista


On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Roberto Gaetano <roberto at icann.org> wrote:

> May I repeat what Jaap has already said, do not confuse the root server
> operators with RSSAC.
> What is being reviewed by Westlake is RSSAC, not the root server operators
> community. A higher involvment of the internet community in RSSAC does not
> mean that different constituencies are going to interfere with root
> operations, in much the same way to have liaisons with the GAC does not
> mean
> interference with how the governments operate.
> At least, this is how I understand it.
> Cheers,
> Roberto
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > [mailto:at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf
> > Of Evan Leibovitch
> > Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 2009 16:43
> > To: At-Large Worldwide
> > Cc: At-Large Worldwide
> > Subject: Re: [At-Large] Review of the DNS Root Server
> > Advisory Committee
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > At-Large mailing list
> > At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlar
> ge-lists.icann.org<http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlar%0Age-lists.icann.org>
> >
> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
>
> ____________
> Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirus
> Version: AVF 19.276 from 25.02.2009
> Virus news: www.antiviruslab.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>



-- 
Joe Baptista
www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative &
Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052)
    Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084