[discuss] Root servers yet again (Re: Roadmap for globalizing IANA)

Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo carlosm3011 at gmail.com
Tue Mar 4 09:56:16 UTC 2014

I '+1' every one of David's comments.

On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 7:20 AM, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:

> Elisabeth
> On Mar 4, 2014, at 2:42 AM, Elisabeth Blanconil <info at vgnic.org> wrote:
> > At 02:45 04/03/2014, nathalie coupet wrote:
> >> Could you, jefsey, Hebe, and others, please address the issue of
> leakage. How could you prevent it (do you want to prevent it)?
> >
> > As David Conrad mentions it, the leakage is a pollution of DNS buffers
> by a different vision of the name space. This would occur in the top zone
> if there were two different identical TLDs, the zones of which would be
> different, documented by two different root server systems of thee same
> class.
> No.  "Pollution" (or perhaps more descriptively cross-contamination) would
> occur in caching servers (and applications that implemented their own
> resolvers like, say, most web browsers) when they queried the name servers
> that offered the different namespaces.  The end result, particularly for
> end users who have no idea what the DNS actually is, would be that it would
> be impossible to tell what a particular name pointed to at any given time.
>  That is, when you sit down at a coffee shop and try to browse "
> www.example.com" you could get something _completely unrelated_ to what
> you get when you browse "www.example.com" from your home. Worse, the end
> user _has no way to figure out which example.com she is going to go to_.
> > Please note that:
> > * The ICANN root is authoritative: the NTIA decides which servers are to
> be listed for the different TLDs.
> Please stop spreading blatant and obvious misinformation.  It is not
> helping the discussion.
> NTIA does NOT decide which servers are listed for TLDs. The TLD
> administrators decide this. NTIA ensures that ICANN follows its processes
> when proposing changes initiated by the TLD administrators.
> > * The ORSN root is non-authoritative: it reports the configuration
> authoritatively indicated by the TLD Managers.
> You are using the DNS term of art "non-authoritative" wrong.  Both ORSN
> and the normal root servers run authoritative servers and respond
> authoritatively to queries for the root zone.
> > it reports the configuration authoritatively indicated by the TLD
> Managers.
> As does the normal root servers.
> ORSN, by serving the root zone data generated by the existing root zone
> partners, does _NOTHING_ different that the normal root servers.  The only
> practical difference between ORSN and the normal root servers is the ORSN
> infrastructure is currently far weaker/less diverse than the existing root
> servers.
> > This is the difference between monarchy and polycracy
> This is pure fantasy.
> > In a non-attacked class,
> No idea what you mean by this.
> > leaks can only happen if an authoritative root administrator decides the
> seizure of TLD.
> No. Really. Just No.  If you actually believe this, you clearly do not
> understand the technology.
> Imagine your coffee shop decides to use an alternative namespace.  Since
> very few people know/care about this alternative namespace, there are very
> few names in it.  Every time you try to go to something like Facebook,
> Amazon, Tmall, Maktoob, etc., you get "name does not exist" (NXDOMAIN)
> errors. Frustrated, you go home. However, because DNS responses are cached,
> when you connect to your home network and try to go to any of those names,
> you _still_ get "name does not exist". This is just one of the many forms
> of leakage (I described another form above).
> It would be extremely helpful if you would stop attempting to confuse
> people.
> > VGNICs reduce the risks from this happening.
> Since I am still unclear as to what "VGNICs" are, I'll take your word on
> this.
> > The DNS IETF model supports 65,365 roots, one for each class. The sole
> class that people discuss on this list is the "IN" ICANN/NTIA class. We
> call this attitude "the BUG", i.e. being unipolarly global.
> I fail to see the value in attempting to redefine common terms.  For an
> actual definition of the term "bug", see
> http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Science/Grace%20Hooper.html
> Regards,
> -drc
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Carlos M. Martinez-Cagnazzo
h <http://cagnazzo.name>ttp://cagnazzo.me
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140304/525c8258/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list