So .... it would be possible for VeriSign to implement a seizure of 
bodog.com only for Maryland?

Nicolas

On 3/10/2012 6:22 AM, JFC Morfin wrote:
> At 07:57 10/03/2012, Nicolas Adam wrote:
>> Well I think I meant the com zone but I was under the impression - 
>> perhaps terminologically challenged, maybe worst - that the com zone 
>> was a subpart of the root zone.
>
> Nickolas,
>
> The DNS works as RFCs stated it should work. This is a machine set.
>
> The DNS is used the way we accept it to be used. It happens that so 
> far Internet users have drastically reduced the DNS to the sole 
> ICANN/NTIA's "IN" CLASS and that they have adopted a real time 
> dissemination of its root file along Paul Vixie's ideas.  ICANN's 
> ideas are stated in ICP-3. Open Roots ideas have been confused by 
> their opponents and where inappropriate when compared to the ICP-3 
> proposed settlement. DJ Berstein's (djbdns) and Sam Trenholme's 
> (MaraDNS) ideas and Microsoft choices also influence the picture. Vint 
> Cerf's ideas are embodied in Google+ and Public DNS real capabilities.
>
> This has led to a DNS management situation where legal decisions 
> enforced in their sovereign territory have unexpected impacts outside 
> of these territories. The DNS RFCs fully document how we can prevent 
> these collateral damages. A solution that prevents iced domain names 
> to be affected are legal outside of the USA and illegal inside the 
> USA. This has nothing to do with the Internet. but with the US Law.
>
> That these solutions which belong to the Internet technology are not 
> being used has only to do with the way we (do not) use the Internet.
>
> jfc