3 ms·
Seriously, fuck the people that want to seize 3 countries worth of ccTLDs. That isn't reasonable or rational behavior. You can't seize top level domains. You s
by opendais 12y ago
Seriously, fuck the people that want to seize 3 countries worth of ccTLDs.
That isn't reasonable or rational behavior. You can't seize top level domains. You shouldn't be allowed to, regardless of the reasons. You break the human-readable internet and DNS if this is allowed.
Some countries will go along with such a seizure, some won't, and the internet will fragment.
- sp332 12y agoWell, ccTLDs anyway. Verisign is authoritative for .com and .net, and generates the root zone file. Control of that could (but probably won't) be transferred for a large amount of money.
- forgottenpass 12y agoI entirely agree with you in principle, but can't bring myself to be angry about it anymore. For the last few years I've been pessimistic about the long term viability of the unary root zone anyway. At one point the users of the internet were collaborative enough to decide "lets just let Jon Postel run this shit." Almost half the world is online now, and depending on the Internet more and more. That kind of collaboration still works (in a more formal manner) for big things if they fly under the user's radar (like the switch to IPv6). Outside of a few flamewars, things gets done (slowly, it's a lot of work, but done nonetheless). How much of the planet relies on and has daily visible interaction with the root zone? A forth? At least? There is already monkeying around in resolvers to add, remove or change records but those are generally isolated and/or purpose specific. Can ICANN, governments, and big ISPs all coordinate and keep their personal interests in check well enough to persevere the the root zone's position as the one and only source of authority?