Re: [NANOG] Re: new.net: yet another dns namespace overlay play
I'm going to start a company and introduce a new TLD. .sucks. I wonder what ICANN would have to say about that. :) At 13:18 03/07/01, you wrote: Which brings me to the interesting borderline case: companyname.sucks.com Can WIPO take away hostname records?:) Pi
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Andrea Abrahamsen wrote:
I'm going to start a company and introduce a new TLD.
.sucks.
I wonder what ICANN would have to say about that.
I'll register icann.sucks :) -- Steven J. Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC | sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net SAY IT LOUD: I'M GEEK AND I'M PROUD! | 888.480.4NET (4638) 216.619.2NET (2638) http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net | http://ClevelandProductions.com http://JustThe.net | Powered by Linux, pizza, Coke, Cuervo, and cheap beer.
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Steven J. Sobol wrote:
I'll register icann.sucks :)
I'll register DNS.sucks The whole idea of unique human-readable names is broken (I would go as far as to say that the idea of any global name space is silly :) Note that the "address space" and "name space" are different because addresses cannot be arbitrarily allocated, and therefore cannot be contentious. 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" :) --vadim PS I know, I know, it is politically impossible to abolish DNS wholesale. Any progress is politically impossible.
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Vadim Antonov wrote:
I'll register DNS.sucks
The whole idea of unique human-readable names is broken (I would go as far as to say that the idea of any global name space is silly :)
It shouldn't be. The great mistake with DNS was allowing a hierarchical network engineering convenience to *become* a flat namespace used as a globally-unique identifier for bodies of data. Historically we could pin this on a) the formulation and standardisation of the URL and b) the existence of gTLDs. 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. Thus removing the visibility of the server domain and eliminating the fistfights over the abused body of the gTLD namespace, relegated DNS to where it belongs - a name-to-IP-address mapping.
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" :)
A similar suggestion, I think - but turn it around so that sites are self-brokered. Portal sites then become indexers of indices. The search engines are, in a way, creators of meta-data.
PS I know, I know, it is politically impossible to abolish DNS wholesale. Any progress is politically impossible.
Nothing is politically impossible. The days of neutral community innovation are not over. If you say it over and over again, you can even believe it. We raised and developed these ideas at the last RIPE meeting with a few colleagues & friends (under the pretext, yes, of "DNS Sucks"). I think the concepts are sound but acceptance is hard; one can't accomplish this with a proprietary, licensed, patented product. - Joshua -[ Joshua Goodall ]----------------------------------------------- -[ Chief Systems Architect, IP R&D ]----- Cook, Geek, Lover ------ -[ joshuag@interxion.com ]--------------- joshua@roughtrade.net --
participants (4)
-
Andrea Abrahamsen -
Joshua Goodall -
Steven J. Sobol -
Vadim Antonov