Re: ISPs as stakeholders

[John Charles Broomfield <jbroom@manta.outremer.com>]

> John Broomfield wrote:
> >The argument of "open up the IANA roots" is just a canard to cover the fact
> >that the "alternatives" have garnered no support (consensus) worth crying
> >out about (remember, only about 0.5% of the internet can resolve those
> >others, however 100% of the internet is free to resolve them should they
> >choose to do so. Thing is the internet doesn't seem to want to).
> 
> 
>  ALTERNIC's 0.5% is vastly more support
>  than CORE can claim. I suppose if you
>  argue the handfull of companies supporting
>  CORE is enough to validate it as one of
>  the competing Network Information Centres
>  you have to accept ALTERNIC is even more
>  promising candidate. ALTERNIC even has
>  working code, root servers to offer us
>  and clients! Amazing that you support
>  Alternic Mr. Broomfield. Or will you
>  engage another logical dodge to avoid
>  the obvious: that there are many equally
>  legitimate stakeholders of which Internic,
>  Alternic and CORE are but three.

Alternic is not in competition with CORE. Alternic is in competition with
IANA. I don't know the name of the mechanism within Alternic (is there one?)
by which new TLDs are decided and how to manage them. IANA on the other hand
chartered and, more importantly, embraced the results of a body to determine
on how to expand the TLD namespace that it manages.
IANA has 99.5% acceptance (and maybe more, because even the alternative
roots use the IANA subset) as opposed to Alternic's 0.5%
If you wish to compare the acceptance following etc of CORE with something,
then you would have to give the name of the mechanism within Alternic which
deals with such things, and tell us how much of the world accepts that...
Alternic is NOT competeing with CORE on how to manage IANA gTLDs. It's
competeing with IANA on how to manage the root.

Yours, John Broomfield.