Re: Devilish: Forget about DNS

LDAP is Lightweight Directory Access Protocol.

It is not in and of itself a multi-purpose distributed directory service,
let alone a globally distributed directory service.

A multi-purpose distributed directory service in a global scale is a hard
problem. I suspect modifying the DNS so that you can add record types and to
address the security problems is a much more manageable approach.

Margaret. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Hadmut Danisch [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:54 PM
To: Viktor S. Grishchenko
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Devilish: Forget about DNS

On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 10:41:38PM +0500, Viktor S. Grishchenko wrote:
> 
> Extremely blatant approach. HTTP is a HyperText Transfer Protocol.

HTML is a Hypertext Language.
HTTP is a transfer Protocol for anything, even if named incorrectly.



> If current DNS is bad then we have to think about DNS-NG.

Do that. And tell me when you're finished. In contrast to 
LDAP, DNS is not intended to be an arbitrary directory service,
but as a Domain Name Service. It's not intended to carry other 
things like authorization record. That's why we have difficulties here.





> 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.


Could you point out  why a DNS-TCP query would be any better or 
more efficient than a HTTP fetch?




> 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.

Ok, we'll raise the problem as we did many times and go to 
hibernate until April 1st 2010.

Hadmut