-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The day that I have to start asking John Doe User questions like this is the day I move back into systems programming, writing device drivers is much less of a headache. I can just see the vendors ads now... go to http://www.abbey.shop (if you are new.net context) or http://www.abby.shop (if you are in mynew.net context). If this happens most of our normal user base will begin leaving in droves. (Count LOST REVENUE... LOST JOBS... PROBABLY MINE!!) This is not an academic exercise. This has become a business catering to ordinary people that are NOT computer/network wizards. The minute we start to require our users to make informed complicated decisions we will begin to loose them all. In the telco world this would be the equivalent of a telco subscribing to one of several SS7 providers - each with overlapping SS7 point codes (this is the telephony routing table).

-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Chris Davis Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 15:24 To: 'nanog@merit.edu' Subject: Multiple Roots simply need context

There is no problem in having hundreds or thousands of multiple root servers for DNS.

We have a problem with CONTEXT. There is no existing way to ascertain the context from which users are resolving domain names.

Solution: DNS Context Servers... DNS operators subscribe their machines to the DNS context they want. In one context, ".xxx" can resolve via new.net, in another context, ".xxx" resolves via one of the other .xxx providers. To keep ICANN and friends happy, ICANN could be the "default" context.

Help calls then have one and only one additional question: "To which DNS context do you subscribe?"

Context servers are pretty obviously where things are headed. Sooner or later, some new.net company is going to "take." If we already have DNS context servers in place, life will be much easier when an alternative TLD provider does succeed.

-Chris Davis --not really selling private address space, that was a joke --not a fan of new.net's plugin, since it breaks ping, traceroute, and tradition

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBOrZ2mxRIXzEQLahvEQK6uACgguSOXWRJtxv9wQrc4YZeHZ88nggAn1Qc urxnAGjLYlh9AIq6p/yDNPzB =A9Dr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

</lurk> Chris Davis wrote:

There is no problem in having hundreds or thousands of multiple root servers for DNS.

Not!

We have a problem with CONTEXT. There is no existing way to ascertain the context from which users are resolving domain names.

I have said this for years... OH! You mean....... * snicker *

Solution: DNS Context Servers... DNS operators subscribe their machines to the DNS context they want. In one context, ".xxx" can resolve via new.net, in another context, ".xxx" resolves via one of the other .xxx providers. To keep ICANN and friends happy, ICANN could be the "default" context.

Perhaps we should leave the door open for multiple context servers, and multiple DNS TLD's.. pretty soon we can complicate resolv so completely, we won't have to bother........ Everyone will get so irritated, they will join MSN, and run IPX. The sooner the better, if you ask me..... I could use the extra sleep! :P

Help calls then have one and only one additional question: "To which DNS context do you subscribe?"

To which the typical user will respond: "Huh ? What ? How should -I- know, -your- the ISP! " Well, * ahem *, we clarified -that- , huh ? Clue: The typical user is stumped by the question: "You know the button with a One and a Zero.... which is it set to, One or Zero ?" "Yes, well Zero means NO network, and One means "join the ONE Network", the Internet.... great idea, huh ? Built -right- into your hardware....." Go ahead, hit the ONE button, and join up, go for it ! ! ! You can do it! :\ Personally, I -actually- expect the conversation to go as follows: Q: "Which context are -you- subscribed to....?" A: "Urrr..... The middle one, of course..." (Flubbing a knowledgeable answer, as the -always- try to do) Q: (To which the Smart Sysop responds) Oh ? ... And would that be the middle one from -my- perspective, or -yours- ? ;)

Context servers are pretty obviously where things are headed.

Cleaning glasses, they must have fogged up.... * squeak squeak * Try again......... I seem to have fogged my glasses opaque. :\ <Lurk> .... ... .. .

Sooner or later, some new.net company is going to "take." If we already have DNS context servers in place, life will be much easier when an alternative TLD provider does succeed.

-Chris Davis --not really selling private address space, that was a joke --not a fan of new.net's plugin, since it breaks ping, traceroute, and tradition