On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 10:57 AM Christian Huitema <huitema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 8/16/2024 7:50 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> We moved from a system where Jon Postel gave you a name which you were
> unlikely to ever lose to one that has been captured by rent seeking. And
> thanks to EFF's grandstanding, the one organization that should have
> absolutely nothing to do with registering names is
> defacto funded/underwritten by the .org registry.
Regardless of the business model of the "DNS industry", we also had to
deal with trade marks. Even if IANA had given you a DNS name "for life",
you could not prevent a trademark owner from suing you if they believed
you were using their mark, and sometimes you would lose.
Again, this problem was made a lot harder in the DNS because we did not consider it in advance.
Blockchain is useless for 99% of the purposes it is sold as panacea for. But append only logs have some really nice properties for a naming system.
People criticize me for proposing solutions without having specs or code, and they get really pissy and threatening when I casually mention having code. Which is basically agenda denial for anyone proposing how to do anything different.
If I was doing the Internet naming system from scratch:
0) Names are normally registered for life, no renewal fees
1) No TLDs, the notion of .com/.net/.org was stupid and a failure. One flat namespace.
2) Names have a canonical representation and a display resolution. "@Microsoft ®" is the display form "@microsoft" is the canonical. Users can type in @MicroSoft and it will work as expected.
3) Registration of display names containing the ® symbol require trademark verification.
3a) Such registrations can also include a verified trademarked logo
4) The dispute resolution system is built in from the start and designed to protect name owners, not just trademark lawyers and their clients.
4a) Challenger pays a fee to register their claim.
4b) Registrant is automatically notified of claim
5) Names can be resolved even in the case of transfer
So while names like @microsoft, @apple etc, need to be handled differently because really bad things happen if they resolve to parties users do not expect, if Mallet registers @namesquat and the arbitrator decides this should be transferred to NameSquat®, these are identifiable in the registry log as @namesquat:0 and @namesquat:1.
Further, if the arbitrator decides that the original registration was for the purpose of creating a malicious confusion, the transfer record notes this and users who have the name in their contacts may be warned of the fact.
Yes, it is a complex problem, one that deserved much more design thought than was possible.
