[82035] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The whole alternate-root ${STATE}horse
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Todd Vierling)
Fri Jul 8 15:38:36 2005
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 07:50:59 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
From: Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org>
To: Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <OF63DF35AA.6FCB5EA0-ON80257036.002FFBDB-80257036.0030A0CC@radianz.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com wrote:
> > The reverse problem is more difficult to deal with -- that of
> > people wanting to access Chinese (or whatever) sites that can only be
> > found in the Chinese-owned alternative root.
>
> There was a time when email service was almost universally
> bundled with Internet access service. Nowadays it is
> quite common for people to get their email service from
> a different supplier than their access. There is no reason
> why DNS resolution could not similarly be unbundled from access.
1. Security ("man-in-the-middle").
2. Common interoperability.
3. *Common sense.* [Erm, oh yeah, perhaps I shouldn't feed the troll.
After all, this is the same guy who thinks that resurrecting the
long dead concept of source routed e-mail is scalable.]
You really should read RFC2826 sometime. It's quite short, as RFCs go.
> If the Internet is to become a global universal network then, by
> definition, it must become balkanized.
Fragmenting the namespace with "alternate" TLDs, breaking common
interoperability, is hardly a path to "universal." BZZZT, try again.
--
-- Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> <tv@pobox.com> <todd@vierling.name>
