Re: Something better than DNS?

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

 



What this thread is lacking is:

There is a difference between being a registry and being a DNS operator.

The role of a registry is to associate a resource with a principle. Like a domain name with a company. Or range of addresses with a person. Or a value in a protocol field with a semantic. Or an address with a network. Or a motor vehicle with an owner. Or a company with a tax identifier. (Registries are not just for the Internet.)

The role of a DNS operator is to publish data associated with a domain name. The challenge is to reliably provide the service over the unreliable nature that is the Internet. DNS operations is a highly technical job, more so that the legality behind registration. Unlike the "market" for registration being beyond the Internet, the market for DNS operations is pretty much the IP-connected world (okay, not just the Internet, but networks using the same technology base until we have DNS over other transports).

When we talk of domain name registries, DNS operations is a component of a registry. DNS operations is not the most important role, however, it just seems that way in the IETF environment because DNS is the most technically involved component. WhoIs and EPP are child's play compared to DNS, technically. And the IETF is rather oblivious to the billing processes, the name dispute process, etc.

There are a number of differing models in play for how domain name (and other Internet) registries operate. There is the ICANN shared registry model which makes registrars and pre-registrars compete to sell services but rely on a central registry. There is the NRO model in which the central registry, IANA, is almost powerless and the five Regional Internet Registries duke it out for the honor of delegating Internet resources. (In fact, recently IANA adopted a policy of doling out IPv6 addresses in certain sizes via a policy foisted from the RIRs to IANA, not from IANA to the RIRs.) When I say "powerless" I mean to draw out that IANA hardly has "monopolistic powers" even though they have the pool of resources doled out.

Not all domain name registries operate that same way. ccTLDs have other operating models. Off-hand I can't give specific examples, but I know of ones that don't have registrars, some that offer a registrar-of-last-resort, and some that compete alongside the registrars. I mention that because there is now about 5 years of history of this kind of market to study, if anyone is concerned about whether a "monopoly registry" is an evil thing.

The one weakness I see in the presentation of CoDoNS is one that is common amongst academic exercises. While it treats a technical problem in a formally defined say, it suffers from the "assume frictional surfaces" syndrome. This disease is not fatal, it is more like the flu, meaning that the work is worthwhile and there are some nuggets of real helpful technology, but taken as one package it is no better than what is out there today - which does not have to assume frictionless surfaces.

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Dessert - aka Service Pack 1 for lunch.

_______________________________________________

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]