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