DNS ideas
Marc Hurst
mhurst at fastlane.ca
Thu Jul 17 15:42:18 UTC 1997
Sounds like eDNS... and that model does work IMHO.
On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
>
> With all this craziness in DNS land lately (the internic going nutz, the
> root domains wigging this morning, etc.), I had come up with on the
> craziest thoguhts I think I ever thunk (!!). Anyway, what about a
> structure like this:
>
>
> 1) Root domain name server operators (RDNSO) -- a selected 10 or 15 people
> in the US and abroad would provide thier *own* equipment, the bandwidth, et
> al. The would do this *for profit*. They would be reviewed, approved, and
> contracted by the 'internet community' as a whole, maybe that community
> represented by a commitee or a board. These people would get PAID for
> having the TLD servers. By who? See #2 # #3.
>
> 2) Forward Registries -- Everyone has been complaining about how bad the
> internic, etc., and why should we have to pay for domains, etc. So, my idea
> is this. The registries would *pay* the RDNSO to host thier TLD's on thier
> server. This would provide a fair, and equal way for competition among
> registries, without having multiple '.'s (ala alternic), and wouldn't
> compromise the RDNSO, beacuse if they screw around and listen to the wrong
> registry, etc., they would be thrown out. The registries can charge
> anything they want; but, the consumer will have the advantage of choosing
> which regsitry they want to use. The only disadvantage is that a TLD (com,
> edu, net, etc.) is 'owned' by a particular registry. But, hey, thats why
> you go to Ford if you want a Taurus.
>
> 3) Reverse Registries -- pretty much the same as #2, but in the ongoing
> effort to conserve ip space (tm), the formation of multiple reverse
> registries should be regulated (excuse the term, but nothing else really
> applies). I think the end-all decision of who gets to be a reverse registry
> is by the IANA, then approved by the board in #1.
>
> Any comments?
>
> ---
>
> "Don't go with a spineless ISP;
> we have more backbone."
>
> Alex Rubenstein -- alex at nac.net -- KC2BUO -- www.nac.net
> net @ccess corporation, 201-983-0725 -- 201-983-0725
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list