Subject: Re: anyone remember when the root servers were hi-jacked? (fwd)

From: Craig Simon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 23:44:51 -0500

I've got a lot of information on this which I'd be happy to share and 
exchange, but I still need and want more details. I'm not sure the IETF 
list is the best place to discuss this matter, however, and if anyone 
can suggest an alternative site, I'd gladly participate there.

Please be aware that I got it partly wrong in my 1998 paper that Michael 
Froomkin cited regarding that incident. I apologize for a misstatement 
which may have been widely propagated. To clarify, the server operators 
who complied with the redirection request were pulling the root zone 
from a separate machine at ISI -- DNSROOT.IANA.ORG -- not B.

The research I've done on this is a central part of my Ph.D. 
dissertation. Anyone who has been holding their breath waiting to read 
it is long dead by now, but I am advancing. It's interesting stuff.

I don't have any after-the-fact explanation from Jon Postel himself 
regarding his motivation, but I disagree with the statement that his 
goal was to "embarrass" the USG.

Though it's fair to say that he was acting partly in reaction to 
pressures from members of CORE, I think his primary rationale was a 
deeply held conception of loyalty to the Internet community and its 
processes.  I argue that he put that sense of loyalty ahead of loyalty 
to the officers of the US Government and their clearly stated wishes, as 
expressed by Ira Magaziner. It took a plain threat of coercion from the 
USG to make him bow and reverse the move.

The problem of divided loyalty and authority in the Internet community 
stretches back to RFC 1174, and was tested in the redirection incident.

Also, while John Gilmore was evidently an important agent leading the 
call for the redirection -- at that particular time -- Paul Vixie 
evidently was not -- at that particular time. Vixie had urged such a 
move in the past, when the atmosphere was not so charged, but his role 
in the Jan 1998 episode seems to have been similar to that of the other 
operators who complied with the request. They went along, even with 
raised eyebrows, but they trusted Postel's judgment and acted with 
loyalty to him and the processes he represented.

Again, I'd be willing to engage this further, and I'd be thrilled to be 
set straight if I've got any other flat facts wrong.  Right now I'm most 
interested in getting nitty gritty details about the negotiations 
between CORE and Ira Magaziner in late 97 early 98, if anyone here can 
help me with that. I'm even more interested in the September 1995 
discussion that ultimately allowed NSI to begin charging for names, but 
Don Mitchell hasn't answered my emails.

Craig Simon

Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
> http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/icann-body.htm#B170
> 
> tells the story as best I could reconstruct it.  There are footnotes to
> the documents I could find.
> 
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 [email-masked] wrote:
> 
> 
>>I'm looking for sources of information on the hi-jacking of the usg root
>>servers by Postel, Gilmore and Vixie.
>>
>>Anyone remember this?  It was on Jan 27 1998 when postel convenced a
>>number of the root operators to switch the primary from a root to f root
>>(paul vixie).  This seems to have been done to embarrase the federal
>>government - Ira magaziner the presidential science advisor took a birdy
>>and treatened postel with a visit from the men in black.
>>
>>I can understand magaziners disposition at the time.  The postel "test"
>>was a day prior to the Jan 28 release of the presidential green paper and
>>left magaziner holding the eggs so to speak.
>>
>>thanks in advance for any links you may have in your archives.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
>

---

From: Aaron Falk <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 22:23:26 -0800

> can suggest an alternative site, I'd gladly participate there.

Consider the internet-history list.  More info at
http://www.postel.org/internet-history/.

--aaron

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:25:26 -0800

Michael,

Thursday, October 31, 2002, 6:28:08 PM, you wrote:
Michael> http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/icann-body.htm#B170
Michael> tells the story as best I could reconstruct it.  There are footnotes to
Michael> the documents I could find.

Notice that Professor Froomkin's "To his detractors" text does not
attempt any balance by offering any other explanation.

As even Prof. Froomkin notes, things were fragile back then. That
included concern over the possibility that NSI would go rogue. NSI
controlled the master root. The one that all others took their data
from. Jon needed to test the ability to switch to a different master
DNS root, to make sure that there were ways to "route around" this
concern over NSI.

That's all the test was.  Jon was clear about the need for this, weeks
before the test.  All anyone needed to do was ask him, rather than
engage in unfounded, inflammatory speculation.

The other point that folks keep forgetting is that Jon had been
issuing operation directives for the root servers since the inception
of the DNS.  How can one "take over" something that one has been
responsible for over its entire existence?

All of the storm and fury has been from people who have had nothing to
do with the running of the DNS, but instead have focused strictly on
the politics of it. (In fact, it was quite interesting to see that a
year of federal inter-agency task force meetings -- including
Magaziner's participation -- took place with most participants having
almost no understanding of DNS technical basics. We had to arrange a
tutorial for them.)

d/
-- 
 Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email-masked]>
 TribalWise <http://www.tribalwise.com>
 t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 08:13:58 -0800

[email-masked] would be a fine place to discuss this
further, as it is (by definition) about (albeit recent) Internet history ;-)

Joe

Craig Simon wrote:
> -
> This message was passed through [email-masked], which
> is a sublist of [email-masked]. Not all messages are passed.
> Decisions on what to pass are made solely by Raffaele D'Albenzio.

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 13:14:53 -0500

>  That included concern over the possibility that NSI would go rogue.

NSI *did* go rogue.  They're still levying a toll on much of the net.  
What ended up becoming ICANN was originally an attempt to keep NSI in
check - too bad it's mostly turned out to be ineffective.

If there was a mistake made, it was in ever letting the master root 
be controlled by a for-profit company.  By the time Jon tried his
'experiment' it was (sadly) far too late.

Keith

---

From: "Daniel Pelstring" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 18:14:42 -0500

Since NSI has gone rogue and, many would argue that ICANN has too, I wish he
was around to run another "test".  Is anybody able to do this again?

-Daniel Pelstring

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Crocker" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>; "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law"
<[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:25 PM
Subject: Re: anyone remember when the root servers were hi-jacked? (fwd)

---

From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:46:44 -0500 (EST)

That's a very good question.

Cheers
Joe Baptista

--
Planet Communications & Computing Facility
a division of The dot.GOD Registry, Limited

---

From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:49:33 -0500 (EST)

Does anyone know of such a list?

Cheers
Joe Baptista

---

From: "Daniel Pelstring" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 23:12:16 -0500

A list of who operates each server, as well as their geographical location
can be found at:
http://root-servers.org/

Quoting from a statement by ICANN:

     "In addition, each root name server operator has contact information
(in hard copy) for all other operators, thus should an issue be detected,
the root name server operators can get in contact with each other (assuming
the telephone system is operational). "

The entire statement can be found at:
http://www.icann.org/committees/dns-root/y2k-statement.htm
although it deals with an unrelated topic, the relevant portion can be found
in the administration section.

I also came across a powerpoint presentation by Paul Vixie and a few others
which states:

    "each root name server operator has contact information (digitally
secured and hardcopy) for all other operators"

The entire version (in HTML courtesy of googles cache) can be found at:
http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:MU55Q5m9DggC:www.wwtld.org/~wwtld/lives
cribe/JunMurai2.ppt+root+server+operator+contact+information&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

I believe the only people able to provide a list are the operators
themselves and ICANN.  Is anybody certain of this?

-Daniel Pelstring

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Baptista" <[email-masked]>
To: "Daniel Pelstring" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 9:49 PM
Subject: IS THERE A CONTACT LIST OF ROOT SERVER OPERATORS - was Re: anyone
remember when the root servers were hi-jacked? (fwd)

> > > Michael>

---

From: Bill Manning <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:20:17 -0800 (PST)

such a list exists.

% 
% Does anyone know of such a list?
% 
% Cheers
% Joe Baptista
% 
% --
% Planet Communications & Computing Facility
% a division of The dot.GOD Registry, Limited
% 
% On Sun, 3 Nov 2002, Daniel Pelstring wrote:
% 
% > Since NSI has gone rogue and, many would argue that ICANN has too, I wish he
% > was around to run another "test".  Is anybody able to do this again?
% >
% > -Daniel Pelstring
% >
% > ----- Original Message -----
% > From: "Dave Crocker" <[email-masked]>
% > To: <[email-masked]>; "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law"
% > <[email-masked]>
% > Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
% > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:25 PM
% > Subject: Re: anyone remember when the root servers were hi-jacked? (fwd)
% >
% >
% > > Michael,
% > >
% > >
% > > Thursday, October 31, 2002, 6:28:08 PM, you wrote:
% > > Michael> http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/icann-body.htm#B170
% > > Michael> tells the story as best I could reconstruct it.  There are
% > footnotes to
% > > Michael> the documents I could find.
% > >
% > > Notice that Professor Froomkin's "To his detractors" text does not
% > > attempt any balance by offering any other explanation.
% > >
% > > As even Prof. Froomkin notes, things were fragile back then. That
% > > included concern over the possibility that NSI would go rogue. NSI
% > > controlled the master root. The one that all others took their data
% > > from. Jon needed to test the ability to switch to a different master
% > > DNS root, to make sure that there were ways to "route around" this
% > > concern over NSI.
% > >
% > > That's all the test was.  Jon was clear about the need for this, weeks
% > > before the test.  All anyone needed to do was ask him, rather than
% > > engage in unfounded, inflammatory speculation.
% > >
% > > The other point that folks keep forgetting is that Jon had been
% > > issuing operation directives for the root servers since the inception
% > > of the DNS.  How can one "take over" something that one has been
% > > responsible for over its entire existence?
% > >
% > > All of the storm and fury has been from people who have had nothing to
% > > do with the running of the DNS, but instead have focused strictly on
% > > the politics of it. (In fact, it was quite interesting to see that a
% > > year of federal inter-agency task force meetings -- including
% > > Magaziner's participation -- took place with most participants having
% > > almost no understanding of DNS technical basics. We had to arrange a
% > > tutorial for them.)
% > >
% > > d/
% > > --
% > >  Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email-masked]>
% > >  TribalWise <http://www.tribalwise.com>
% > >  t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850
% > >
% > >
% >
% 

-- 
--bill