Editing AlterNIC (section)

== Controversy ==
A part of the [[Internet community]] has praised the initiative, with some recent scholarship proposing that alternative DNS roots may allow for a more democratic network control structure.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Bastick|first=Zach|title=Our Internet and Freedom of Speech 'Hobbled by History': Introducing Plural Control Structures Needed to Redress a Decade of Linear Policy|journal=European Commission: European Journal of EPractice|year=2012|series=Policy Lessons Learned: Policy lessons from a decade of eGovernment, eHealth & eInclusion|issue=15|pages=97–111|url=http://www.epractice.eu/files/Journal_Volume_15_PART8_0.pdf}}</ref> Yet many others considered it harmful to the Internet. Using an [[alternative DNS root]] breaks the principle of [[universal resolvability]], unless it is for a strictly private purpose. From a DNS perspective, it prevents some parts of the Internet from reaching other parts. [[Jon Postel]], a significant contributor to [[Internet standard]]s, asserted that it would lead to chaos.<ref name="sw1" />  In May 2000, the [[Internet Architecture Board]] spoke out strongly against alternative roots in RFC 2826.<ref>RFC 2826 (informational), ''IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS Root'', Internet Architecture Board, The Internet Society (May 2000)</ref>