Re: Statements against new.net?

[Patrick Greenwell <patrick () cybernothing org>]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 11:29:23 PST, Patrick Greenwell said:
>
> > To be clear I am not arguing the merits of any of these particular
> > efforts, but simply that they exist, are operational, and as of yet the
> > "Internet" has not come crashing down upon anyones head. 
>
> Yes, and I can run an SMTP server that requires all input to be ROT13
> encrypted, and it won't bring down the Internet.  If 2-3% of the sites
> ran such SMTP servers, it wouldn't bring down the internet.
>
> If however, half the servers were ROT13 and half weren't, and the two
> did not interoperate, things WOULD start failing.

And do you believe that people would simply sit on their hands and lament
the lack of interoperability? 

> If you use one root, everybody agrees what things look like.
>
> If you use multiple roots, what people will see depends on which root they ask.
>
> How is this political?

"...That one root must be supported by a set of coordinated root servers
administered by a unique naming authority."