dns - golog

Simon Waters simonw at zynet.net
Fri Oct 20 07:45:29 UTC 2006

On Friday 20 Oct 2006 00:35, you wrote:
> Here's a visionary article related to this topic, but
> at the root server level, even more of a delicate issue,
> but with the same principles as the one we're discussing:

No this is the difference between impersonation, and service.

I think one problem is that IANA doesn't have a "brand name", so when you buy 
an Internet connection you aren't told you are getting an IANA DNS, that is 
assumed. The interesting question is whether that is sustainable if a lot of 
ISPs provide a non-IANA DNS service. There may be an argument for saying that 
"non IANA DNS" services can't be described as "Internet services", but that 
is an issue for ICANNs lawyers.

> http://www.circleid.com/posts/techies_wanna_do_policy/

Karl was so wrong on the F root-server issue. Paul asserted no new right, most 
companies and organisation would act legally against impersonators of their 
products and services, Paul is merely asserting he believes IANA (or the ISC 
since it is their address space) would do the same. 

Let us assume, for the moment at least, that the ISC will do what Paul thinks 
is the correct thing to do!

There is a HUGE difference between providing a modified DNS service to ones 
consenting clients, and subverting the Internet experience in such a way that 
clients find that systems clients are talking to, are fakes.

> And this article shows the convenience of falling back
> on standards when they serve your purpose:
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/paul_vixie_on_fort_nocs/

The only standards fallen back on, are an assertion that there are standards 
root server operators must adhere to, or lose their role. That is a statement 
of fact -- although one might argue as to whether one could effectively 
enforce these standards -- bringing facts, and expertise, to the debate is 
why you want people like Paul involved.

More information about the NANOG mailing list