But reliability alone isn't enough to satisfy some members of the international community, who are uneasy about what they see as U.S. control of the root server system.

Brazil presents one example. The country's citizens file their taxes through the Internet to a “.br” domain name. Yet the proper functioning of that domain name depends on the U.S.-dominated domain name and root server system. As Vixie put it: “There has never been a dependency of that kind between nations. The autonomy of one depends on the good will of the other. The word ‘unprecedented’ really does apply here.”

Americans would be legitimately concerned if such functionality were dependent on Brazil; conversely, other countries also have legitimate concerns about their dependence on the U.S., critics argue. Such critics also argue that Department of Commerce involvement has turned ICANN into an instrument of U.S. foreign policy. For example, they accuse the organization of deliberately dragging its heels on assigning a top-level domain to North Korea. Among the more paranoid of international concerns is that the U.S. might use its domain name and root server control as a bargaining chip when negotiating international trade agreements, or could even shut down global Internet access to an enemy nation — at least temporarily.

In response to these concerns, one organization in Europe has gone so far as to create an alternative root server system. On its Web page, the Open Root Server Network, says, “The network coordinated by ICANN is, as far as we are concerned, a high-quality and sure solution. However, the locations of the separate root server systems are very dependent on the U.S.A.”

The Web site also asserts that “the U.S.A. is theoretically and practically able to control ‘our’ access to contents to the Internet and also to limit them. A manipulation of the root zone could cause the whole name space “.de” [the top-level domain for Germany] to not be attainable for the rest of the world outside Germany.” ORSN's goal is “to limit the influence and control of the U.S.A. substantially.”

ORSN simply mirrors the domain name information provided by the traditional root server system. Experts agree that it's a fairly simple task to pull the relevant information from the existing system. It's also a relatively simple matter to establish an alternative root server system. To use such a system, ISPs or other users must change a setting in their domain name server software that points to the traditional root server system by default.

The biggest concerns about alternative root systems come into play when the system operator assigns a top-level domain that the traditional system doesn't recognize and cannot point users to — a phenomenon known as “balkanization.” When this occurs, the ability of Internet users worldwide to reach one another is compromised — and this already exists to some extent.

Alternative namespace providers typically set up their own top-level domains with the goal of selling domain names ending in that suffix, which are not available from the established system. Any ISP or other organization that points its domain name server (DNS) to these alternative root server systems can reach the Web sites attached to those domain names. But since almost no one sets up DNS servers that way, such domain names are of limited value. The sellers of such offerings, some say, are essentially cyber rip-off artists.

“These have been fledgling efforts that have been successful among individual ISPs, but not the Internet as a whole,” said Ken Silva, chief technology officer for VeriSign. “The Internet has grown because of its consistency, no matter where in the world you are. The last thing we want to do is to start balkanizing the Internet.”