The whole alternate-root ${STATE}horse

Sat Jul 9 18:47:26 UTC 2005

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Todd Vierling" <tv at duh.org>
To: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra at baylink.com>
Cc: <nanog at merit.edu>
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: The whole alternate-root ${STATE}horse

> 
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> 
> > I'm going to dive in one more time here.
> >
> > It's not the *root* operators that are the problem -- it's the *TLD*
> > zone operators.
> 
> Oh, I can certainly agree with that; we've seen some gross abuses of TLDs
> documented in gory detail right here on the NANOG list.
> 
> Of course, that too is orthogonal to who provides the delegations in "." --
> except that perhaps some misguided souls are, as is relatively common,
> confusing the two realms.
> 
> > > Introducing fragmented TLDs or the opportunity to supplant the common TLDs
> > > places the DNS infrastructure at risk.  This is not just FUD -- DNS
> > > hijacking in alternate roots has already happened.  (But if you had actually
> > > read RFC2826, you would already understand this.)
> >
> > "infrastructure at risk".  Justify this *far-reaching* statement,
> > please.  Show your work.
> 
> AlterNIC overriding .COM and .NET listings, one of the issues leading to its
> demise.  (This was done in addition to the more memorable cache poisoning
> attacks against INTERNIC.NET.)
> 

Yes, and Eugene was punished for that. Notice that AlterNic really doesn't exist
anymore.  

Repeat after me - COLLISIONS ARE BAD! We all agree with that.

> -- Todd Vierling <tv at duh.org> <tv at pobox.com> <todd at vierling.name>
> 
> 

John