How common is lack of DNS server diversity?

Sun Jan 28 00:14:31 UTC 2001

[ On Saturday, January 27, 2001 at 15:15:00 (-0800), Roeland Meyer wrote: ]
> Subject: RE: How common is lack of DNS server diversity?
>
> I agree, but the definitions were evolved from existing, not recreated. The
> problem is that there are tiers of responsibility with in the LD and there
> are many LDs. For example; UK has both the TLD and SLD as fixed and sells
> registrations in the 3LD. AU also does this, but are considering opening up
> the SLD for new registrations. We have two different authority layers here,
> not just one. Also ml.org --> dhs.com, sells 3LDs in COM, how do we talk
> about them, operationally?

That's all totally irrelevant and meaningless, especially to a basic
simple discussion of the technical workings of the DNS.

> Also authority, for any LD, is different than that for a zone. Yet, both
> name servers will answer as authoritative. Even the software doesn't make a
> distinction. Further, and here is where the semantics become difficult, what
> do you call the final non-recursive authority vs. the authoritative
> recursive resolving authority (and do you want to spell that definition out
> 10 times per paragraph)?

Duh?  What?  Nonsense!

If a recursive nameserver answers authoritatively then it's broken!

If a registered nameserver does not answer authoritatively then it is
"lame".

If an authoritative nameserver answers recursive queries, then it's
likely in danger.

> > Root Server == An authoritative server for the "." (root) of 
> > the domain
> >                name system
> 
> The problem is that we have more than one set of authoritative root servers
> and one set includes the other. The current semantics do not allow that at
> all. This is fine for the unified-root school, but the reality is that it
> isn't the ONLY school and denial wont make the others go away.

What the heck are you talking about?!?!?!?!

As you say there's always only ever going to be just one set of
authoritative root servers in _the_ DNS.  There cannot be any more.

Obviously there can be conflicting DNS's, but that doesn't change the
basic technical limitation of there only ever being one root in the DNS
(whichever DNS you care to use! ;-).

And, as it happens, currently there is only one recognised DNS, with one
set of authoritative root servers.

Anyone who says otherwise is just one of those renegades who can safely
be ignored and they *will* go away.

In any case, technically, there's still only one "root" zone, and only
one set of authoritative root servers, no matter who's DNS you use.
There's no need to invent any new BS to describe something that plainly
does not exist.

> > TLD Server == An authoritative server for a Top Level Domain, such as
> >               the generic TLDs (COM, EDU, INT) and country 
> >               code TLDs (CA, AU, ZA)
> 
> The problem is (as stated above), there are many authority layers beyond
> that of the TLD. Yes, some of them are getting politisized (repeat what I
> said about Mktg and double it).
> 
> The real danger is that a schism is developing in the semantics (between
> Eng, Mtkg, and the politicians). This may be a pre-cursor to a schism at the
> root-level itself. I would dearly like NOT to see that.

That's all totally irrelevant -- just techno-political babble that's
designed to confuse and obfuscate the true technical reality.

Nobody serious about the commercial Internet can afford to leave the
current DNS behind, and any attempts the renegades make at running an
independent DNS that includes the real one as a subset is bound to stay
marginalised and have little or no effect on the current DNS.

It's all about power, and as they say, absolute power corrupts
absolutely, no matter who's DNS you use!  :-)

The only reason we even need new top level domains is that the original
big four were never managed properly and have not yet been retired in
favour of only using country-code domains.  So now we contemplate almost
infinite growth of more of the same mess instead cleaning things up, all
because a bunch of greedy people have found a way of extracting
potentially unlimited sums from a vast number of other people, sums
several orders of magnitude more than would be otherwise necessary in a
sane hirearchical world-wide DNS.

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <gwoods at acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods at planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods at weird.com>