North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: The whole alternate-root ${STATE}horse (was Re: Enable BIND cache server to resolve chinese domain name?)
I have the BIND source, its available to the public. You want to know how hard it is? I'll show you. I will write it. Thats what I do for a living. I accept your challenge. See you in six months. FYI: I don't speak for anyone but myself and ADNS/American Webmasters. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <[email protected]> To: "NANOG" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 6:37 PM Subject: Re: The whole alternate-root ${STATE}horse (was Re: Enable BIND cache server to resolve chinese domain name?) > > On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 01:06:15AM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote: > > > To many alt-roots? Or too many alt-TLD's? > > > > Too many of the former is likely to lead to having too many of > > the latter. Both are bad. > > I don't know that I agree with either of those assertions, absent > collision problems, personally, but this subthread officially makes > this a religious argument; comments here off-list. > > > >> The problem is that they are pretty much guaranteed to get at > > >> cross-purposes. > > > > > > Well, there have been alt-root zones available for, what 6 or 7 years > > > now? And how many collisions have there actually been in practice? 2? > > > 3? > > > > We have not yet hit the knee of the curve. > > Perhaps. I think those people are *much* more concerned about this > than I think you think they are. > > > >> I don't think that's really practical. I'm sorry, I just don't > > >> trust them to write a resolver that's going to get included in libc > > >> (or wherever), and for which the world is going to be dependant. > > > > > > Well, I meant "at your customer recursive resolver servers", since the > > > topic at hand was "what do IAP's do to support their retail customers", > > > but... > > > > I don't trust them to write code that will be used in > > mission-critical situations or places, regardless of where that is. > > Wasn't sure which them you meant here... > > > It's not that they don't have the best intentions -- I'm sure > > that at least some of them do. It's that they don't have the > > necessary experience. > > > > The people I would trust to have enough of the right experience > > to make something like this work (if that's possible at all) are the > > same people who wrote Nominum's ANS and CNS. However, I suspect that > > they would probably be about the last people in the world who would > > be interested in trying to make something like this work. > > And then I figured it out. > > Hmmm... again, absent TLD collisions, I don't see that writing a > recursive-only server that can coalesce the TLD namespace from multiple > roots ought to be *that* hard... but then I'm not Cricket, neither. > > > >> People will always be able to access data by pure IP address, or > > >> choosing to use the real root servers. Push come to shove, and the > > >> real root servers could be proxied through other systems via other > > >> methods. > > > > > > "Real" is *such* a metaphysical term here, isn't it? :-) > > > > Heh. Shall we use the term IRS? As in Incumbent Root Servers? > > I don't have a problem with that one, the amusing connotations > notwithstanding. Incumbent isn't a value judgement, it's merely > descriptive. > > > >> 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. > > > > > > Stipulated. But whose problem *is* that? > > > > The users will make it our problem, if we don't get this sorted out soon. > > Yup, it is. > > And my perception is that the cat is *out* of the bag, and fretting > about how bad it would be were the cat to get out of the bag (which is > my perception of most people's view of this issue) isn't especially > productive; the solution is to figure out how to manage the problem. > > Cheers, > -- jra > -- > Jay R. Ashworth [email protected] > Designer Baylink RFC 2100 > Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 > St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 > > If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me > >
|