[Chapter-delegates] Draft ISOC comments on WGIG report

[Steve Crocker]

Patrick,

I'd like to take issue with your comments.  See below.

Steve


Steve Crocker
steve at shinkuro.com


On Aug 10, 2005, at 12:30 AM, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:

> On Wed, August 10, 2005 2:14, Franck Martin said:
>
>> Steve,
>>
>> I guess it predates ICANN, but putting such a statement in the WGIG
>> report implicates that there can be only 13 root servers and  
>> that's it.
>> So many countries cannot have a root server. I find this statement
>> highly misleading and in defavor of ICANN.
>>
>
> Franck,
>
> The statement is technically correct. I think it would be much more
> positive for ISOC to point out how and when the technical community  
> will
> address that weakness.

In what way is this a weakness?  The domain name system is designed  
to provide fast, reliable translation of domain names into IP  
addresses.  It is designed to do so for all Internet users around the  
globe and to give the same answers to everyone.  The amount of  
redundancy needed at each level is fundamentally an engineering  
question.  The limitation of 13 root servers addresses comes from the  
interaction of the sizes of packets and the amount of information  
needed for each address.  From a design point of view, half that  
number would probably be more than adequate.  With anycast, the  
actual replication of servers is now around 100 and can be extended  
considerably further.

Where's the weakness?

(I don't want to suggest the domain name system is perfect.  There  
are indeed some weaknesses in DNS, but they're not related to this  
discussion.  DNSSEC addresses some of the weaknesses.)

> There may not be a technical reason to go beyond 13 root servers, but
> there are plenty of political reasons. The debate here is whether
> technologists are at the service of the society or if the society  
> should
> use what the technologists think is good for them.


Let me push back very hard on this point.  I agree technology should  
serve society, but there is an equal requirement in the other  
direction that "society" choose sensible problems for technologists  
to solve.  The idea that each country needs its own root server is an  
entirely artificial and meaningless "requirement."  It has no  
relationship to providing accurate, reliable, responsive Internet  
service.  It is being driven solely by political forces for  
appearances and ego.  I don't know whether such forces will  
ultimately play a role in determining the architecture of the  
Internet in the future, but I think we in the Internet Society have  
an obligation to help the rest of the world understand the difference  
between real and meaningful issues and those that don't serve any  
larger socially useful purpose.

Steve