May 1997 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Root Name Server Confederations
by Sean M. Doran 22 May '97

22 May '97

You don't want my code. It has too many parentheses in it. However, I can send you a crisis (well, one seems to be coming without my help at all, actually), which might prompt more talented programmers to come up with something that fixes the current silly politics and improves the utility of the DNS for what it's actually potentially good for. Sean.

1 0

Re: Root Name Server Confederations
by smd＠clock.org 22 May '97

22 May '97

Paul A Vixie <paul(a)vix.com> writes: > makes one long for the days of HOSTS.TXT. which was at least reliable and > coherent. maybe it'll make a comeback in the form of everybody-run-their-own > "." server. Hey, I take it back, a PVM-must-die thread on NANOG hasn't happened in a long time. Maybe NANOG isn't _utterly_ useless (only mostly)... > i guess i've said this about 900 times now. DNS is a coherent, distributed > database. don't do anything that will make it less > coherent. Kill it outright. Build something that doesn't use the unreliable datagram protocol with all of its wonderful deficiencies, perhaps leaving the description of the database itself to the implementors (concentrating on protocol instead), and ideally avoiding the in-addr.arpa botch and the difficulties of scaling really large zones. Denninger and company are wonderful because they are forcing some issues which go right back to the days of HOSTS.TXT and the ARPA zone. I seriously hope they are able to forestall the insufficient bandaid approaches being proposed by more moderate technical people. > start back in on things that will make the same name mean something different > (or become meaningless) depending on where you're standing when you resolve > it. But this is a really neat idea; have the DNS or its follow-on(s) represent _services_ and the utility of having this feature is fairly obvious. This is to some extent how NATs work, after all. A complaint about how '<port>.<zone>.<zone>...' can lead to confusion is a complaint about the lack of directory services through one can find a service in the first place. Sean.

2 1

Re: Root Name Server Confederations
by smd＠clock.org 22 May '97

22 May '97

Marc Hurst <mhurst(a)fastlane.ca> writes: > If I lose I WILL eat crow at the next NANOG meeting (bbq flavoured if > possible). So here I am in the terminal room of the RIPE meeting and realizing how completely indescribable my current lack of motivation for going to yet another NANOG meeting is, particularly one in the summertime in Florida. I do hear, however, that alligators can be fun to feed. Despite that, could I humbly suggest that the NANOG organization and mailing list be wound down? I think their work is done. Sean.

1 0

IOPS website is now available
by Michael Dillon 21 May '97

21 May '97

I just finished reading through the http://www.iops.org website. Have a look... Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael(a)memra.com The bottom line is track record. Not track tearing. Not track derailing. But pounding the damn dirt around the track with the rest of us worms. -- Randy Bush

1 0

Re: QoS/CoS interest
by sob＠academ.com 21 May '97

21 May '97

As I am involved in deploying a GigaPOP here in Houston and attaching it to SESQUINET as well as the I2 infrastructure, I am working with QoS issues (at an architectural level) regularly. I do expect to do some deployment as this year comes to an end, but there are many issues (some technical and some not) that will affect this roll out. -- Stan | Academ Consulting Services |internet: sob(a)academ.com Olan | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: {mcsun|amdahl}!academ!sob Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.

1 0

Re: What have you done for me lately?
by Eric Germann 21 May '97

21 May '97

At 12:47 AM 5/21/97 CDT, Joseph T. Klein wrote: >I belive it will take a volunteer effort ... > >--- On Wed, 21 May 1997 00:56:00 -0400 (EDT) Todd Graham Lewis <lists(a)reflections.eng.mindspring.net> wrote: > >Yeah ... the stuff you can hardly see between the flames. We need >a few people to gleen the list and turn it into a web page. > http://www.cctec.com/maillists/nanog I don't douse the flame wars, however, it is searchable and is a complete history, so you can search around the bombs. Updated nightly... Eric ============================================================================ ==== Eric Germann Computer and Communications Technologies ekgermann(a)cctec.com Van Wert, OH 45891 Phone: 419 968 2640 http://www.cctec.com Fax: 419 968 2641 Network Design, Connectivity & System Integration Services A Microsoft Solution Provider

1 0

Re: Root Name Server Confederations
by Paul A Vixie 21 May '97

21 May '97

Danger. I'm still ranting. Don't read this. Someone asked in private e-mail... > What's to keep someone from adding some of those "bogus" root servers into > a cache file? What harm would it do? There seems to be something I'm > missing? If I had users that wanted access to .web, couldn't I add those > into the cache? which .web do you mean? the one iahc is creating, the one amblin tried to create, or one of the dozen that will be created next week if piracy proves to be a useful way to add top level domain names? (did the ISP explosion teach you guys NOTHING about copycatting?) and when one of your customers wants foo.web and the other wants bar.web and you can't satisfy both because they're in different .web's? and when one of your customers wants foo.web and the other wants foo.web except they are different web sites depending on which root servers you point at? ultimately the answer is: there is one "." and anybody who tells you otherwise is trying to sell you something that you do NOT want to pay for. (keep your hand on your wallet.) hell, i may create a .web zone of my own if the money is THAT easy to get. in fact, let's ALL create .web and then let's create usenet:alt.gtlds.web and use it to synchronize entries therein. that way when someone creates foo.web (in exchange for a service fee from the FOO company), everyone else who has a .web domain can add the same delegation (even though they did NOT get a service fee from the FOO company) and there will be no conflicts. what's that you say? impractical? well if it won't work for .web, WHAT MAKES YOU THINK IT WILL WORK FOR "." ??? the issues are clear cut. pirates are loose on the seas you're surfing, and most of them want your money. some of them want power. a few of them just want some personal recognition -- it hurts their feelings that they weren't consulted on whether there should or shouldn't have been an IAHC. none of these pirates give a rat's a** whether your customers all get the same FOO when they ask for FOO.WEB. in fact at least one of them thinks this would be a feature since each FOO _deserves_ a chance to be FOO.WEB. makes one long for the days of HOSTS.TXT. which was at least reliable and coherent. maybe it'll make a comeback in the form of everybody-run-their-own "." server. i guess i've said this about 900 times now. DNS is a coherent, distributed database. don't do anything that will make it less coherent. don't lets start back in on things that will make the same name mean something different (or become meaningless) depending on where you're standing when you resolve it.

3 2

Re: Root Name Server Confederations
by Vadim Antonov 21 May '97

21 May '97

Marc Hurst <mhurst(a)fastlane.ca> wrote: >FUCK YOU!!! I would like to ask NANOG list administrator to filter out everything from fastlane.ca. Enough is enough. --vadim

1 0

Re: What have you done for me lately?
by sob＠academ.com 21 May '97

21 May '97

> Does anyone give a shit about training the next generation of network > operators, or maybe increasing the clue factor of the present one? Part of the point of the NANOG notes I do is to help all network operators. It helps me understand things better by doing them. Hopefully I am lucid enough that others benefit as well. I do know that some folks benefit, because I hear from a few that offer comments, assistance at futher meetings (like the one in June--hint,hint), and encouragement. I don't know if they help you, Todd, but if you have any specific suggestions that could make them more helpful to you, just send them to me in private mail. -- Stan | Academ Consulting Services |internet: sob(a)academ.com Olan | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: {mcsun|amdahl}!academ!sob Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.

1 0

current DNS/registry thread
by Alan Hannan 21 May '97

21 May '97

Please stop. This is not productive and a waste of many people's valuable time. Do something useful. Break your fingers. Anything. But do it elsewhere. Please stop polluting NANOG with your DNS tripings. -a

1 0