|
The last thing we need is even more use of DNS[*] to locate
services. DNS is too often out of sync with reality as it is.
A really unfortunate consequence of using DNS for service
discovery results from a tendency to centralize DNS administration
within an organization, even if (as is often the case) hosts and
applications are administered in a distributed fashion. In any
organization large enough to have an administrative hierarchy,
this is a profoundly dysfunctional arrangement. It gives the
central DNS administration a huge amount of ability to break
things (whether due to incompetence, poor communication, or petty
turf wars - usually some of all of these), whereas the very nature
of such an organization makes it almost impossible for them to get
things right. Using DNS for SD in a widespread fashion only
exacerbates the problem. Part of the problem is the too-common notion that there are
"public" names and "local" names, meaning that the DNS name space
is polluted with names that aren't in the hierarchy. A separate,
though related, problem is that there's no architected way to
distinguish one from the other. [*] By "DNS" here I mean the naming hierarchy, which is of course
related to the data model. I agree with you that the current
protocol is a disaster and that it should be replaced (and yes,
it's completely doable even without breaking DNSSEC), but fixing
the protocol alone would not solve this problem.
On 2/26/19 1:57 PM, Phillip
Hallam-Baker wrote:
|
