Re: Devilish: Forget about DNS

On Monday 09 February 2004 21:50, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
> We could use a much more modern and robust protocol, the
> famous and ubiquous HTTP.

Extremely blatant approach. HTTP is a HyperText Transfer Protocol.
If current DNS is bad then we have to think about DNS-NG.

> lost TXT records. Just normal use of existing protocols exactly for
> what they have been designed for. :-)

Really? 1st of April is two months away :)

Speaking on topic... Yes, DNS is ancient. It is very efficient, but that 
efficiency was ate up by inefficient exploitation: 
http://www.caida.org/outreach/papers/2003/dnsspectroscopy/dnsspectroscopy.pdf
http://www.caida.org/outreach/papers/2003/dnspackets/wessels-pam2003.pdf
There are much more other, technical or usability issues about DNS, but:
the key point is that DNS isn't suited to express Trust, Reputation and 
Authority. If global naming service will be replaced (not patched, but 
replaced), it is because of that.

What ASRG can do? Just raise the problem and write requirements, relevant to 
the spam problem. And, of course, do that in parallel with LMAP.

Looking forward, we may require LMAP to be somehow generic about naming 
service, or split it in two parts (RFCs, or just chapters; one is generic, 
another is DNS-related).

-- 

	Viktor S. Grishchenko