Vadim Antonov wrote:
Build a search engine which takes "old" domain name "WWW.CNN.COM" and produces URL with 207.25.71.27 in it :)
And then build wedges into operating systems and application software to automatically access this search engine when presented with names. Congratulations, you've just re-invented DNS, but with more overhead. No matter what you end up using, you are going to need some kind of directory service for users to look up the entities they are accessing. If DNS doesn't cut it for some applications, then perhaps another system can be added. One such example is the "Internet keywords" concept used by AOL and some web browsers. (See also http://www.realnames.com/) This doesn't require that the existing DNS system be trashed.
I'm wondering how people managed to find CNN on TV -- after all, CNN ads didn't feature local channel numbers :)
Most cable companies send customers a printed list of channel mappings, and mail out updates when the lineup changes. Or they just channel-surf and look at every single channel until they find it. Telephone systems (which are closer in magnitude to the internet than television systems) send customers printed directories every year and provide (usually for a fee) a directory assistance service. None of these systems work any better than DNS: - A quick reference card can't work when you've got millions of hosts. - Channel surfing is equally useless. The internet is several orders of magnitude bigger than a television system. - Printed directories are impractical and expensive. Given the rate of change, you'd need to reissue it at least once a month. Putting the directory on CD-ROM may help with the publication costs, but you would still need to distribute them. And customers will have to pay for a subscription to this. And you'd still need a directory service in order to allow access to nodes that are added/changed and have not yet gotten into the directory. If you end up relying on an on-line service, then you've just re-invented DNS. -- David