March 2001 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: [NANOG] Re: new.net: yet another dns namespace overlay play
by Ben Browning 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

At 06:00 PM 3/7/2001, Vadim Antonov wrote: >The only real solutiuon to the present and future DNS woes is to replace >it with the hyperlinks, portals, address books and search engines - and >_no_ human-readable names. This effectively creates as many "roots" as >there are users. My "John Doe" is not the same as your "John Doe" :) For some reason, I can't see CNN broadcasting "Come visit our website, at 207.25.71.27 or 207.25.71.28 or 207.25.71.29 or 207.25.71.30 or 207.25.71.5 or 207.25.71.6 or 207.25.71.20 or 207.25.71.22 or 207.25.71.23 or 207.25.71.24 or or 207.25.71.25 or 207.25.71.26". Not to mention the fact that IPv6 will make that even uglier. I *like* DNS. Abolishing it would be akin to, say, removing the UNIX path environment variable and all aliasing/symlinking support from the kernel. ~Ben (I speak for myself, here) --- Ben Browning <benb(a)theriver.com> The River Internet Access Co. Network Operations 1-877-88-RIVER http://www.theriver.com

9 11

RE: new.net
by Mathew Butler 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

You -could- always do the whois-type thing, where ALL records containing 'apple' are returned, on first access to the name? -Mat Butler -----Original Message----- From: Simon Lockhart [mailto:simonl@rd.bbc.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 2:32 PM To: richb(a)pioneer.ci.net Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: new.net >Therefore any company which creates a broader hierarchy is not motivated >by what's best for Internet users, who are best served by a simple >hierarchy (IBM is IBM is IBM no matter what you append to it). Okay. You picked an example which proves your point. However, there's plenty of exceptions. Who should have "apple" in this flat namespace? Apple Computers? Apple Records? Apple Fruitstore? While the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) is a fairly well-known name worldwide, what gives us more claim to "bbc" in the flat namespace than "Big Blue and Cousins" or "Baptist Bible College" (bbc.org and bbc.edu respectively)? Have we now got bbc.com because we had a greater claim to it, or because we had the better lawyers? Simon -- Simon Lockhart | Tel: +44 (0)1737 839676 Internet Engineering Manager | Fax: +44 (0)1737 839516 BBC Internet Services | Email: Simon.Lockhart(a)bbc.co.uk Kingswood Warren,Tadworth,Surrey,UK | URL: http://support.bbc.co.uk/

3 2

Re: new.net
by richb＠pioneer.ci.net 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

William Allen Simpson <wsimpson(a)greendragon.com> wrote: > In Spain, the City of Barcelona has trademarked barcelona.es, .com, > .net, and .org. Excessive (in my view), but no surprise with the > actions of Llena. This thread makes me wonder why the city of Boston didn't try to grab Boston.com. Perhaps they did, but the current holder (a large daily newspaper owned by none other than the NY Times) has deep enough pockets to engage in a lengthy battle. The original holder of that domain was Au Bon Pain, based in Cambridge: a croissant and coffee shop. My $0.02 on the nature of naming: this is just exactly like the 800 toll-free prefix. As soon as 888 opened up, whoever held 800-FLOWERS then had to reserve 888-FLOWERS. (I recall trying to get a mnemonic 888 number, but gave up after learning that all the good ones were taken within 60 days.) Now there's 877 and 866. The mnemonic names are, no doubt, all taken by the same folks who got the 800 prefixes. People who create a trademark want to have it protected globally. It's human nature. We *want* a flat namespace. If someone tries to spread it out across a hierarchy, we instinctively use our resources to *grab* our piece of the rest of the hierarchical turf. Therefore any company which creates a broader hierarchy is not motivated by what's best for Internet users, who are best served by a simple hierarchy (IBM is IBM is IBM no matter what you append to it). The company is motivated by collecting a toll from those lawyers representing companies who seek to grab their piece of the turf. Corporate entities should be *required* to register in the flat dot-com namespace, IMHO, and not be *allowed* names in any other namespace. All DNS does is complicate network management. Vadim's position is extreme, but not too far off the mark. Keep it simple, stupid, should be ICANN's guiding philosophy on this. Wonder how to implement this without turning it all over to the bureaucrats at the US Patent & Trademark Office? -rich

3 4

Re: Statistics for Public Peering Points
by Akio Sugeno 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

At PM 11:33 03/08/01, Devon True wrote: >All: > >Does anyone know of an online resource where one can see daily statistics >for the various public peering points? E.g. MAE-East, MAE-West, etc. >Anything I found online was either out-of-date or required a username/password. http://www.ep.net/stats.html --akio ----------------------------------- Akio Sugeno Chairman of NYIIX/LAIIX/6IIX Voice: 718-355-2509, Fax: 718-355-2517

1 0

Re: Statistics for Public Peering Points
by Paul Thornton 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

For the LINX in the UK, you can visit http://ochre.linx.net for publically available statistics. The total traffic acorss the MAEs always used to be available - don't know what the url is though, or even if its still there - sorry. -- Paul = = Paul Thornton (currently down-under) = =

1 0

Statistics for Public Peering Points
by Devon True 08 Mar '01

08 Mar '01

All: Does anyone know of an online resource where one can see daily statistics for the various public peering points? E.g. MAE-East, MAE-West, etc. Anything I found online was either out-of-date or required a username/password. Thanks! ----- Devon

1 0

Re: new.net: yet another dns namespace overlay play
by Scott Gifford 08 Mar '01

08 Mar '01

> Another stated rationale is that ICANN UDRP is "flawed". I'm not sure > how adding pirate domains improves the UDRP. The pirate has publically > stated that it will follow the UDRP. > > Several folks suggested examples of "reverse-hijacked" domain > decisions. I've taken a bit of time to look at the most frequently > cited. Here's two that are exemplar: [ ... ] We've probably strayed way off-topic, but I think that it speaks volumes about how well the UDRP works that research had to be done to find two cases where it made a reasonable ruling. -------ScottG.

2 1

RE: Little survey: What do people use to backup configurations ?
by Irwin Lazar 08 Mar '01

08 Mar '01

> put into rcs. Now before I am resurecting those scripts again for my > current job, what are people using to backup equipment, things such > as Cisco routers (26xx, 36xx, 72xx, 75xx, MSFC, RSM) and Cisco Catalyst > switches (2924XL, 3548XL, 4000, 5000, 6500) ? I use a small program called disco that sends an SNMP write request to the router to initiate a 'write net' then receives the file via tftp. It's available at http://web.mit.edu/ktools/ and works for at least linux and solaris. --- I've seen lots of homegrown scripts like the above. A lot of our customers use element managers such as CiscoWorks. The nice thing about the element managers is that they will flag any changes that might have been made and not recorded. Irwin

2 1

Re: Namespaces (was: new.net: yet another dns namespace overlay play)
by Scott Gifford 08 Mar '01

08 Mar '01

Joshua Goodall <joshua(a)roughtrade.net> writes: [ ... ] > A better method for addressing data would be based on source-brokered, > signed, distributed caches of keywords that can be search and, more > importantly, bookmarked in the context of each signer. I'm not sure I want something that elaborate to ftp a file from my laptop to my desktop. And I certainly don't want to have to remember IP addresses for both of them. I think DNS works pretty well. You just have to think of it like an 800 number --- 800 numbers are ambiguous (1-800-CONTACTS could provide information about how to contact people, information about aliens contacting the earth, or information about the old PBS show 3-2-1 Contact!, but it in fact sells contact lenses), but they're still easier to remember than the digits. ------ScottG.

2 1

The .SUCKS TLD saga continues
by Karyn Ulriksen 08 Mar '01

08 Mar '01

Okay. You guys all asked for it. Robert Sexton over at ORSC will be adding it to his fold and dns will be served out of here. I will be setting up a "registration" page this weekend to request domains probably out of my www.valkaryn.net site. No fees planned. I would just like to be able to email anyone about changes. If it grows very large, I will set up a whois server for it and an availability check. Since there has been some commercial interest in .sucks domains, I will probably be changing the password access by next Monday and lock down the domain indexing a little further. In the meantime, you can introduce the following lines in your cache file if you don't use ORSC: sucks. 86400 IN NS dns-01-002.root-dns.com. sucks. 86400 IN NS dns-01-001.root-dns.com. If you would like a ".suck" or ".sucks" domain in the meantime, email me with your request and contact information. If you want the domain to point to your own nameservers, please be sure to provide the nameserver information. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Best regards, Karyn Ulriksen Network Operations Manager PublicHost, A VitalStream Company 1 Jenner, Suite 100 Irvine, California 92618 USA Phone: (949) 743-2000 email: kulriksen(a)publichost.com URL: http://www.publichost.com ===========================================

1 0