Re: Something better than DNS?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> > DNS is broken since people started disallowing AXFR transfers.

> Not sure I understand your point. You query a record, you get an answer.
> Why on earth would you want to suck all the world's zone files ?

Some people want to publish their own Domain Naming Service
with additional information such as new top level domains.
But they don't wnat to go through any IANA/ICANN process.
If they can suck down all the top level zone files then
it is easy for them to publish an ALTERNATIVE DNS VIEW
that contains their own additions. Anyone who uses their
view will then see the so-called official DNS info as
well as the overlay.

> > In addition DNS is designed with a single one root scope. So if you
> > have to deal with chinese, arab and russian namespaces then DNS 
probably
> > is not the right choice :)
> 
> Agree. Add to that the current architecture does not allow competition
> at the TLD level. There can only be one registry for any given TLD,
> leading to artificial scarcity and lack of consumer choice.

This is yet again an attempt to extend the scope of the DNS
beyond what it was designed to do. DNS was created because of the
need for a distributed naming service and in today's Internet, the
domain naming service is a critical part of the Internet's 
infrastructural underpinnings. It is not a product which is 
bought by consumers. It is, by design, controlled by a single
authority at each level. If that were changed then companies
like IBM would lose their authoritative ownership of ibm.com
and that is not in their best interests nor is it in the best
interests of consumers.

The restrictions imposed by the current architecture provide
the stability and reliability that is required in a system
that plays such a critical infrastructure role in the public
Internet. 
 
> Aside from the technical requirements to return reliable answers to
> queries, it should also make it possible to have multiple registries for
> the same TLD

The protocol does not prevent this. Indeed many private internets
do operate their own root or add unofficial TLDs to their DNS.
A good book on the DNS will explain how to do this safely. 

A lot of the people who want to see "competition" in the domain 
naming service, fail to understand the IETF's role in this space.
The IETF can only specify a protocol. They cannot wave a magic
wand and make the whole world start using a new protocol or migrate
from an existing protocol. In fact, if there was significant demand
for such competition, no support from the IETF would be needed. 
In 1991, http was created outside of the IETF. It met with such
huge demand that a later version of the protocol was issued as an
IETF protocol 5 years later in RFC 1945.

--Michael Dillon


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]