OK, as much fun as this is...
GPRS relies heavily on a tunneling mechanism (called GTP) for cellular
mobility. It's IP based.
The DNS that users know ANYTHING about is used INSIDE the tunnel - if a GPRS
user types www.yahoo.com, that's INSIDE the tunnel.
.gprs is used OUTSIDE the tunnel, to find GGSNs for SGSNs, etc.
.gprs is not an alt-root, it's not even the DNS for a "walled garden" that
any GPRS user will ever see directly, unless you think that SGSNs are "DNS
users". It is ONLY used for GPRS infrastructure devices to find each other
inside a GPRS infrastructure IP network.
Some number of GPRS operators ALSO operate DNS for end users in a walled
garden, but that has nothing to do with .gprs. It would be a serious concern
if GPRS end users could send untunneled packets directly to GPRS
infrastructure devices, because, sadly, it's very rare that GPRS operators
use IPsec to secure the operation of the GPRS infrastructure.
If you don't understand any abbreviation I used in this e-mail, you don't
know enough about .gprs to have an opinion about it (some people on this
list do know quite enough about .gprs to have an opinion about it, but that
doesn't mean that everyone on this list does).
Followups to www.3gpp.org. But thanks for playing.
Spencer
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxx>
On 09:53 03/10/2005, Brian E Carpenter said:
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
http://www.neustar.com/pressroom/files/announcements/ns_pr_09282005.pdf
Comments welcome. Is it to be understood as an alt-root? or is it a
legitimate hower single operator?
Neither. .gprs appears to be a private pseudo-TLD inside a walled
garden for GPRS operators. It doesn't have anything to do with
the Internet's namespace. .3gppnetwork.org appears to be a
perfectly normal Internet 2LD.
Dear Brian,
I have difficulty in understanding this. You talk of "Internet's name
space". I feel difficult to reconcile this with an NGN approach. Also with
the Internet as the network of the networks of different technologies?
IMHO there is a single name space for a single world digital ecosystem
service continuity. May be a good example of the difference between a
net-centric and a user-centric architecture?
I agree with Harald. However we could imagine to support their so created
name space through a different class, as suggested by ICANN (in ICP-3).
Due to the number of users and ubiquity, I tend to think their root system
may take the lead in many places (small islands, an international
priority) and as an extranet back-up solution?
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf