Rooted in controversy

Similar questions are sometimes raised about the root server system itself.

“I would create a body whose sole job is to oversee the root server operators,” Auerbach said. “The root server operators are a great group of people, but there should be a body to set technical standards for the root servers to follow. If you keep it to technology, there's not a lot to fight about.”

Vixie disagreed. “As a self-organized system, it has turned into a highly reliable thing of beauty,” he said. “I'd hate to tinker with it for fear of breaking it.”

Another root server operator has a different take. VeriSign has an MOU about its root server operations, but some other root server operators do not, Silva said. “It would be nice if all root servers had an MOU so there was some expectation of performance across all of them,” he said. Silva hastened to add that he's not accusing other root server operators of performance problems, “But moving forward, it would be nice to know there's a mechanism for that.” VeriSign also would like to see more coordination among root server operators to share best practices, Silva said.

ICANN's Crain said an advisory committee has been put in place to look at issues such as how to review root server operator performance and whether they should have more formal agreements. “There's been ongoing discussions,” Crain said. “I can't reveal details, but I suspect we will see something more in about a year.”

As root server operators have deployed more servers worldwide, some international concerns about U.S. dominance have been addressed — and Mueller argued that if the Department of Commerce were to step out of ICANN, the international community would have even fewer concerns about the root server system. But others believe the U.S. still has too much control. Auerbach, for example, argued that the U.S. government, which operates servers through the Department of Defense and the U.S. Army Research Lab, should not be involved in root server management.

Auerbach also questioned the financial stability underpinning the root server system. Unlike ICANN, which earns revenue from top-level domain registrations, root servers often are cost centers for the organizations that operate them. Some root server operators are non-profits that rely on grants to fund their operations. Recognizing this, Auerbach said, “We should offer them some financial stability. I'd like to make sure they have a letter of credit so that they have funds they could draw on in case of an emergency.”

Crain sees a certain irony in some of the accusations that have been aimed at the root server system. “It's seen as a form of power, whereas it's really more of a duty,” he said.

Despite their diversity and lack of a formal structure, the root server community to date seem to have had a common view of what that duty entailed. One hopes, for the sake of the Internet, that any future actions clarify, rather than obscure, that common duty.

THE ROOT SERVER SYSTEM

SERVER	OPERATOR	LOCATION
A	VeriSign Naming and Directory Services	Dulles, Va.
B	Information Sciences Institute	Marina Del Rey, Calif.
C	Cogent Communications	Herndon, Va.; Los Angeles; New York City; Chicago
D	University of Maryland	College Park, Md.
E	NASA Ames Research Center	Mountain View, Calif.
F	Internet Systems Consortium Inc.	40 sites: Ottawa, Canada; Palo Alto, Calif.; San Jose, Calif.; New York City; San Francisco; Madrid, Spain; Hong Kong; Los Angeles; Rome; Auckland, New Zealand; Sao Paulo, Brazil; Beijing; Seoul, South Korea; Moscow; Taipei, Taiwan; Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Paris; Singapore; Brisbane, Australia; Toronto; Monterrey, Mexico; Lisbon, Portugal; Johannesburg, South Africa; Tel Aviv, Israel; Jakarta, Indonesia; Munich, Germany; Osaka, Japan; Prague, Czech Republic; Amsterdam, Netherlands; Barcelona, Spain; Nairobi, Kenya; Chennai, India; London; Santiago de Chile; Dhaka, Bangladesh; Karachi, Pakistan; Torino, Italy; Chicago; Buenos Aires, Spain; Caracas, Venezuela
G	U.S. DOD Network Information Center	Vienna, Va.
H	U.S. Army Research Lab	Aberdeen, Md.
I	Autonomica/NORDUnet	29 sites: Stockholm, Sweden; Helsinki, Finland; Milan, Italy; London; Geneva, Switzerland; Amsterdam, Netherlands; Oslo, Norway; Bangkok, Thailand; Hong Kong; Brussels, Belgium; Frankfurt, Germany; Ankara, Turkey; Bucharest, Romania; Chicago; Washington D.C.; Tokyo; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Palo Alto, Calif.; Jakarta, Indonesia; Wellington, New Zealand; Johannesburg, South Africa; Perth, Australia; San Francisco; New York; Singapore; Miami; Ashburn, Va.; Mumbai, India; Beijing
J	VeriSign Naming and Directory Services	22 sites: Dulles Va. (2 locations); Sterling, Va (2 locations); Mountain View Calif.; Seattle; Atlanta; Los Angeles; Miami; Sunnyvale, Calif.; Amsterdam , Netherlands; Stockholm, Sweden; London; Dublin, Ireland; Tokyo; Seoul, South Korea; Singapore; Sydney; Sao Paulo, Brazil; Brasilia, Brazil; Toronto; Montreal
K	Reseaux IP Europeens-Network Coordination Centre	London; Amsterdam; Frankfurt, Germany; Athens, Greece; Doha, Qatar; Milan, Italy; Reykjavik, Iceland; Helsinki, Finland; Geneva, Switzerland; Poznan, Poland; Budapest, Hungary; Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates; Tokyo; Brisbane, Australia; Miami; Delhi, India; Novosibirsk, Russia
L	Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers	Los Angeles
M	WIDE Project	Tokyo; Seoul, South Korea; Paris; San Francisco
Source: www.root-servers.org

GLOBAL INTERNET FACTS & FIGURES

1.08 B

Estimated number of Internet users worldwide ¹

439 M

Estimated umber of top-level Internet domains by host count, worldwide ²

$300 M

Estimated amount that domain registrants pay to VeriSign annually for “.com” domains ³

10,000

Estimated minimum of domain inquiries per second handled root server operator ISC ⁴

12

Total number of organizations administering the root server infrastructure on which global Internet usage depends

¹ Internet World Stats ² Network Wizards Internet Domain Survey ³ Karl Auerbach, Internetworking Labs ⁴ Internet Systems Consortium