Domain Name Rights Coalition

An Infrastrure TLD - Avoiding the Side Effects of Today's .net: "

I've mentioned before that there is something special about the .net top level domain - in particular .net is the place where the legacy root DNS servers and most of the TLD servers are to be found. Thus, if .net were to wobble there is more than a strong chance that the DNS root and other TLDs would also begin to wobble. This kind of cross-dependency is something that A) is a risk to overall internet stability and B) is something that ICANN seems utterly unable to perceive.

So I ask this simple question: Why can't the domain names of the legacy root servers and TLD servers be moved to a new global infrastructure top level domain? Such a new TLD would be intrinsically much more stable than .net. In fact because the size would be small, a new infrastructure-only TLD could be readily cached and replicated, thus providing much more resiliency against attack and could be recovered much more quickly than .net should an attack be successful.

This new TLD should be used only for machines that provide services in support of DNS on a global basis (with the proviso that any server that delivers a TLD zone for any TLD, whether that TLD is ICANN approved or not, should be considered 'global infrastructure'.)

For the moment let's call this new TLD 'q8m', which is a short phrase without any annoying semantics (I hope).

Thus this infrastructure TLD would contain delegations for things like 'root-servers.q8m' and 'tld-servers.q8m' to replace the existing 'root-servers.net' and 'tld-servers.net'.

Anyone who wants to establish a group of infrastructure servers would register for a delegation in this this infrastructure TLD. The registration agreement would require that the registrant police the use of the delegation so that the resource records found via that delegation are all present for the exclusive purpose of providing infrastructure services.

In order to discourage spurious thrashing of the contents of this infrastructure TLD there should be a steeply ramped fee schedule for updates. The first 4 per year should be inexpensive ($25) but after that the fee should quickly ramp up to at least $100 per update.

Were this kind of infrastructure TLD to be established, much of the special nature of .net would be eliminated; a failure of .net would not then have the kind of destructive repercussions onto other parts of the internet that is now the case.

(Via CaveBear Blog.)

Posted by mikki at 10:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

We definitely have quite a bit to worry about from mandatory federal ID cards that have technology that can read them up to 30 feet away. With identity theft as rampant as it is NOW, shouldn't the Feds take a second, third and a fourth look at this idea and the technology behind it before implementation of such a risky scheme?

As usual, EPIC has the facts. Read on.

Federal ID cards need more thought | CNET News.com: "In response to the Perspectives column written by Phil Libin, 'Technology alarmism in spades': We are writing in response to Phil Libin's CNET News.com column on May 17, 2005, 'Technology alarmism in spades.' In it, Mr. Libin criticized the Electronic Privacy Information Center's April 2005 Spotlight on Surveillance report, 'Homeland Security ID Card Is Not So Secure,' which is an evaluation of the Department of Homeland Security's Access Card (DAC). Mr. Libin also posted a longer criticism of the report on his blog, 'Vastly Important Notes.' Mr. Libin's column and blog entry contain several errors, and EPIC takes this opportunity to refute his criticisms. Mr. Libin's most significant error is his assertion that the DAC's ISO 14443 technology is not Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). However, technology experts, the industry and CNET News.com itself, label ISO 14443 as RFID. RFID is a generic category that encompasses many types of chips: Some are passive (they are dormant until read at close range); some are active (they are always ready to be read at a greater distance); some offer plaintext or encrypted data in addition to authentication mechanisms (ISO 14443 A&B). What they have in common is that they use radio waves to request and transmit data, as opposed to contact cards, which require physical contact with a reader to receive and transmit information."

(Via .)

Posted by mikki at 12:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

EFF Obtains Draft PATRIOT Bill: "

Bill Gives Justice Department More Power to Demand Private Records

On Thursday, May 26, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence will consider in closed session a draft bill that would both renew and expand various USA PATRIOT Act powers. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has obtained a copy of the draft bill, along with the committee's summary of it, and has made them available to journalists and interested citizens on its website, http://www.eff.org/.

'Even though Congress is still debating whether to renew the broad surveillance authorities granted by the original USA PATRIOT Act, the Justice Department is already lobbying for even more unchecked authority to demand the private records of citizens who are not suspected of any crime,' said Kevin Bankston, EFF attorney and Equal Justice Works/Bruce J. Ennis Fellow. 'The Senate's intelligence committee should focus on adding checks and balances to protect against abuse of already-existing PATRIOT powers, or repealing them altogether, rather than working to expand them behind closed doors.'

Draft of new PATRIOT Act powers.

Senate Select Committee summary.

Contacts:
Kevin Bankston
Attorney, Equal Justice Works / Bruce J. Ennis Fellow
Electronic Frontier Foundation
bankston@eff.org

Lee Tien
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
tien@eff.org

(Via EFF: Press.)

Posted by mikki at 11:41 PM | Permalink

Intellectual Property Justice League (Ernest Miller): "

Copyfighters may want to visit the IP Justice League of America, 'celebrating the only comic book of international super-star INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY super heroes!' Not much there yet, except some Warhol-esque portraits that rollover to declare:

• Eblen Moglen - 'Batman'
• Larry Lessig - 'Superman'
• John Gilmore - 'Green Lantern'
• Robin Gross - 'Wonder Woman'
• Richard Stallman - 'The Martian'
• Ed Felten - 'The Flash'

Can the IP Justice League save Wil Wheaton from super-villain Jack Valenti? Will they defeat his evil army of psycho culture pirates!? Whose side is Avril Lavigne REALLY on??

(And would this group actually call themselves the Intellectual Property League? Wouldn't they use some other term?)

via BoingBoing

(Via Copyfight.)

Posted by mikki at 05:42 PM | Permalink