Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: Jim Fleming
Date/Time: Sat, October 27, 2001 at 3:16 AM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Subject: 0:201 .COM


0:201 .COM

Now that Windows XP is out, with IPv6 and support for "IPv8
Addressing". We have to turn our attention to moving beyond
the "toy" Early Experitmental IPv4 Internet, into more robust
infrastructure and architectures. ICANN claims to be focusing
their up-coming meeting on Stability and Security as it relates
to the DNS. One area that should be addressed is the Single Point
of Failure of the .COM zone management, with only one vendor
involved in the Registry Operations.

In order to move .COM into the Proof-of-Concept Phase, a
Dual Registry arrangement (similar to .BIZ) needs to be established. This will allow for a totally redundant .COM Registry operation
which will protect against failure from having a single registry
vendor. In constructing the redundant .COM Registry, it would seem
prudent not to select a vendor on the East Coast of the U.S. and
in the State of Virginia. In fact, it might be wise to have the
redundant .COM Registry constructed by several vendors cooperating
on the needed infrastructure. Now that TLDs have seen some expansion
(after years of absurd delays), there appear to be more vendors
with the technology and resources required to clone the COM registry

One of the advantages of doing this at this time, is that the new
.COM Registry can be built with the latest technology and native
support for IPv6 systems. The current IPv4 .COM servers can not
communicate with "native" IPv6 systems. That may help to discourage
the growth of native IPv6, which will needed to allow for more
fair allocation of Internet resources as the net expands.

Jim Fleming
Proof of Concept TLD Development...and Multiple TLD Clusters
RFC-2001-06-27-001 - Obtaining IPv8 Address Allocations



Message Thread: