consensus
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNU/consensus] Fwd: An Update from the Name Resolution Trenches


From: carlo von lynX
Subject: Re: [GNU/consensus] Fwd: An Update from the Name Resolution Trenches
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:02:14 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

Useful mail, thank you.
Regarding Mr Connery's personal opinion however:

> I have a suggestion to the tor, gnunet, i2p, and
> other overlay communities.  It seems likely to me
> that the IANA will not be too happy about reserving
> all of .onion, .exit, .gnu, .zkey, .i2p and .bit.
> I suggest that you ask for ONLY ONE pTLD.  For
> example, .p2p, and then stick all your specifics inside
> that.  e.g
> 
>  .onion.p2p
>  .gnu.p2p

Yes yes, bow to politics and bureaucracy.. would be so
amusing if by 2030 hardly anyone is using traditional
DNS and therefore all Internet business happens over
something .p2p, yet for backwards compatibility there's
always this senseless .p2p in the way.

Also, public-key routing is not limited to P2P architectures.

> From: DNSOP on behalf of Paul Vixie
> 
> TL;DR: i'd like to only behave differently if the other side signals its
> readiness for it. in a "big TCP" model where thousands or tens of
> thousands of sessions remain open while idle (even if only for a few
> seconds), we are asking for application, library, kernel, RAM, CPU, and
> firewall conditions that are not pervasive in the installed base --
> which includes tens of millions of responders who will never be
> upgraded, and whose operators are not reading this mailing list, and
> will not be reading any new RFCs on the topic.

This assumes that a legislation as proposed in
http://youbroketheinternet.org/legislation/ will
never be signed into law. Mr Vixie is looking at
the status quo from a too narrow perspective.

> == An Update from the Name Resolution Trenches ==
> 
> Summary: 
> 
> In the internet name resolution space,
> the only real solutions for privacy are going 
> to come from the overlay communities, like
> tor and gnunet.  a.k.a DNS is too big to fail (change
> significantly).  Plus a suggestion below [P2P].

And the law proposal makes the deployment of such a solution
a government and industry priority, and makes it a required
default for new systems.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]