[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PSO-PC Position on the Alternative Roots Issue



Vladimir,

looks good to me.

-Philipp

"Androuchko, Vladimir" a écrit :
> 
> Dear Protocol Council Members,
> If you agree this would be the version of PSO-PC Statement to be send to Mr. S. Lynn.
> Kind regards,
> Vlad
> 
> Dear Stuart,
> On behalf of the Protocol Council, I'm sending you the Position of the
> PSO-PC on the Alternative Roots Issue. It was agreed that each Protocol
> Supporting Organization gives also its comments/statements concerning
> the Alternative Roots Issue.
> 
> The PSO Statement is:
> 
> "The Internet DNS currently operates using a Single Authoritative Root
> Server System. Although, it would be technically possible to devise and
> standardize a fully compliant alternative multiple root server system,
> there appears to be no technical reason for changing from the present
> working system, as this would require the development of a new set of
> protocols for use by the DNS."
> 
> Additional IETF statement:
> 
> "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.  IETF does not see any technical benefit
> in such an effort."
> 
> The ITU-T Study Group 2 conclusion on the Alternative Roots Issue,
> which was reached during the ITU-T Study Group 2 meeting (Geneva, 4-14
> September 2001) states:
> 
> "Study Group 2 has noted the PSO statement and has no objections to it.
> However, Study Group 2 notes that there may be other issues in
> addition to technical reasons such as administrative and national
> sovereignty considerations."
> 
> ETSI supports the IETF statement and the ITU-T Study Group 2 statement.
> ETSI considers that the ITU-T Study Group 2 statement  is outside the scope
> of the PSO.
> W3C supported IETF Statement.