DNS Control

Thu Mar 15 13:42:33 UTC 2001

On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, mike harrison wrote:

> > > > Because the current DNS has a single contention point, it is very
> > > > vulnerable.  It can be very easily taken over by a large 
> > > > corporate entity.
> > > 
> > > The let's design a better system.
> > 
> > <TONGUE POSITION="CHEEK">
> > When its done, can we please move it the hell out of the US?
> > </TONGUE>
> 
> As pro-American as I am, this has a certain appeal. 

Until you examine the alternatives carefully. 

> No longer are things done for the 'good of the 'net'
> but for control and profit. At what point do we truly
> internationalize things that have this vulnerability.
> Although I think the United Nations is more corrupt
> than even the USA Corporate/Govt world, maybe 
> some things need to be under control of a multi-nation
> /government agency recognized by all parties for the good 
> of the 'net.

All efforts so far along this line have attracted swarms of 
lobbyists and empire-building bureaucrats.  Yes, Network
Solutions is bad.  Unfortunately the alternatives look worse.

The problem is the fact that the DNS is hierarchically 
structured.  At the top there is a single point of control, 
which is of immense value.  

The solution is restructuring the DNS so that there is no
one point of control, and therefore no honey pot to attract
the flies.

> As a socially responsible anarchist, I can't believe
> I just said it, but it may be a better solution than
> a Verisign(ish) corporation saying: This domain/trademark
> is being disputed, and as XYZMegaCorp Corporation pays us $$$
> a year for multiple services... you lose.
> 
> The big problem: a person(s) really in charge of such
> things that we all would trust explicitly, or at least
> a reasonable amount.

I would assume right from the start that there is no one who 
can be trusted with this.

--
Jim Dixon                  VBCnet GB Ltd           http://www.vbc.net
tel +44 117 929 1316                             fax +44 117 927 2015