Re: DNS Evolution Alert

["Philip J. Nesser II" <pjnesser () martigny ai mit edu>]

Okay,

I can't resist going one more round.  Be warned.  Hit delete now.


Jim Fleming supposedly said:
> On Wednesday, May 28, 1997 9:47 AM, Philip J. Nesser II[SMTP:pjnesser () martigny ai mit edu] wrote:
> @ Just to be clear for anyone who is actually doing something useful with
> @ their time and has not been following the DNS issues,  the self styled
> @ 'eDNS' is in the process of collapsing and Jim is doing his best to
> @ spin-doctor it into an "evolution".  I feel sorry for any of the poor souls
> @ who actually gave those people money, or worse tried to build a business
> @ based on it.
> @ 
> @ --->  Phil
> @ 
> @ 
>
> Phil,
>
> You may want to go back to Biology 101 and take another
> peek in that microscope. As you will note, when cells divide
> there is a moment of tension and then voila, there are two
> identical copies. [Note: the organism does not die when this
> occurs, it often becomes stronger.]

True.  But when an ax chops the head off of a chicken there is a moment of
tension and the voila, there are two pieces, one runs around for a little
bit spewing blood and then collapses. [Note:  the organism does indeed die
when this occurs, it often becomes dinner.]


> If you are following the evolution, you will see that some of the
> Registration Authorities (RAs) have decided to fund their own
> Root Name Server Confederation. They are independent of the
> eDNS Root Name Server Confederation and it appears that
> their confederation is going to be called "uDNS".

Yes, and according to one of the founders, they are scrambling like mad to
try and pull the remains back together. (I deleted the message already or I
would have quoted it)  It remains to be seen if they are like a cell or
like a chicken.

> The evolution of Root Name Server Confederations is very
> much like the world of "peering agreements". 

Not it is not.

> It is sort of ironic
> that everyone involved in this evolution seems to want the
> same thing, a stable, viable, and growing Internet. Because
> they want to have the freedom to work with the people they
> trust and enjoy working with, they can not all subscribe to
> a single "party line". As the evolution occurs, the organism
> grows stronger.

It depends on the type of evolution.  There are plenty of evolutionary
paths that lead to extinction, in fact most do.  There is usually only a
small percentage of evolutionary steps that lead to something better and to
stretch the analogy to the limit, I don't believe the eDNS or your Root
Nameserver Confederations produce an evolution that is better.

> It is always interesting to see spectators cheering for the
> organism to die. Maybe you can explain why you think that
> would be better than the current situation.

When I see any creature that is dying slowly and painfully, yes I would
like to see it put out of its misery since the conclusion is inevitable.  
To use the analogy above, the axe has only half cut off the chickens head
and now it is running around squawking and making a racket.  It would have
been cleaner to have cut the head off completely.  It would certainly have
been quieter.


--->  Phil




- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -