Dear Steve, dear PSO PC colleagues, I fully support the propose words provided by Steve.. Kind regards, Azucena At 14:49 21/09/01 -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >In message <905DD86907DAD3119DE70000778D770F04E41246@mailsrv1.itu.ch>, "Androuc >hko, Vladimir" writes: >>Hello, >>Dear Protocol Council Members, > >I'm not sure I'm responding to the proper version of this note -- I >received three very similar notes, and two recall notes. (It would be >nice, I might add, if the "recall" notes cited the Message-Id of the >message being recalled.) > >Anyway -- we really need to rework the wording to make it clearer >and less ambiguous -- or at least less subject to willful misreading. >At the Montevideo meeting, John Klensin repeated the basic message >of RFC 2826 by pointing out that the formal, mathematical definitions >of things like "trees" and "roots" do not permit even a meaningful >discussion of multiple roots in the DNS. > >Here is some possible alternative language, derived from Leslie's >earlier suggestion. > > The Internet currently operates using a tree-structured > name space known as the DNS. Of necessity, such a name > space must have a single, authoritative root. Moving to > a model that would not require such a single, authoritative > root would require replacing the present, working DNS with > some other system. Such a replacement would require the > development of a new naming paradigm, as well as the > protocols and software to implement it. Developing and > deploying such replacement protocols would take years, and > would have enormous potential for disruption of the Internet. > The PSO does not see any technical benefit in such an > effort. > >It says essentially the same thing as our earlier wording -- that >one can conceive of different ways to do name resolution -- but >points out the costs. While there has been little explicit >discussion of the earlier, ambiguous, text within the IETF, some >who have seen it and the proposals based on it have reacted very >strongly. For the Protocol Council to fail to take action in this >area would probably invite a unilateral response from the IETF. > > > --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb > http://www.wilyhacker.com > > > ************************************************* Azucena Hernandez Telefonica Desarrollo de Red c/ Emilio Vargas, 4. E-28043-MADRID Tel: +34 91 5846842 Fax: +34 91 5846843 GSM: +34 609 425506 E-Mail: azucena.hernandez@telefonica.es ************************************************