[Chapter-delegates] China proposes Internet fragmentation via DNS alternate roots

[Roque Galliano]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Carlos Martinez Cagnazzo <
carlosmarcelomartinez at gmail.com> wrote:

> RFC 6598, or the extension of private space RFC 1918-like space may be
> arguable (I'm personally far from convinced) but it has little
> 'political' implications, zero chances of fragmenting the Internet and
> only marginal other implications.
>
> So yes, I don't think alternate roots have a chance of getting any kind
> of IESG endorsement.
>

What I do not understand is why would they need an IETF document and
particularly a standard document, there is nothing new there!!!

What if they come with an informational document that basically says: "This
is how DNS works in China"? We may not like it, but there they would have a
much stronger position to get it through the process.

Roque



> Carlos
>
> On 6/18/12 10:38 AM, Peter Koch wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:21:55AM +0200, Carlos Martinez wrote:
> >> I also believe that such a thing will never make it past the IESG.
> > people have wrongly believed this on previous occasions, e.g. RFC 6598.
> >
> >> So in the I think Olivier's comment was right on the spot. It will be
> interesting to see what happens next.
> > This may or may not be a tempest in a teapot, but i believe ISOC's role
> > as a translator between the technical and political spheres (or
> Universes,
> > if you wish - noting that the plural is as challenging here as in the
> > draft under discussion) would suggest we come up with a list of technical
> > and operational challenges (such as uniqueness of identifiers, operation
> > of the gateway infrastructure, ...).  The chapter delegates list might
> > not be the right place for this, but I figure we got at least two
> distinct
> > mailing lists for the pre-WCIT discussions - as well as the lists in the
> > appropriate technical fora.
> >
> > Finally, for those less exposed to the IETF, the fact that someone
> publishes
> > an Internet-Draft does not mean the document is "under consideration" by
> > the IETF or one of its working groups, at all.
> >
> > -Peter
> > _______________________________________________
> > Chapter-delegates mailing list
> > Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> > https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20120618/67212f4b/attachment.htm>