Thanks for that. The original claim was that these name spaces were global in scope, but not part of the Internet. So I took that as face value. Your example, while perhaps a valid interpretation, is not what was asked for. If it is, then namespace/class specific applications/extentions need to be developed/deployed, OR folks need to suck it up and just use the Internet portion of the DNS (and its associated rules, e.g. new TLDs are defined by ICANN)
/bill On 3July2015Friday, at 7:01, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 9:43 AM, manning <bmann...@karoshi.com> wrote: >> Actually, there IS an escape method already defined. We just don’t use it >> much these days. >> It’s called “class” >> >> There is no reason these alternate namespaces should sit in the IN class. >> they could/should be in their >> own class, like the old CHAOS protocols. So a class “ONION” or “P2P” >> would work out very nicely. > > Yup, but the problem is that people want to be able to enter the > alternate namespace names into existing applications (like browsers, > ssh, etc), just like a "normal" DNS name. They want to be able to > email links around (like https://facebookcorewwwi.onion/ ) and have > others click on them, etc. > > There is no way that I know of to tell e.g Safari to look this up in a > different class... and, even if there were, they would *still* leak, > because people are lazy... > > W > >> >> After all it’s the Domain Name System. (can comprehend names in multiple >> domains, not just the Internet) >> >> manning >> bmann...@karoshi.com >> PO Box 12317 >> Marina del Rey, CA 90295 >> 310.322.8102 >> >> >> >> On 2July2015Thursday, at 20:56, manning <bmann...@karoshi.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 2July2015Thursday, at 18:21, Robert Edmonds <edmo...@mycre.ws> wrote: >>> >>>> manning wrote: >>>>> There in lies the problem. These systems have no way to disambiguate >>>>> a local v. global scope. >>>>> It seems like the obvious solution is to ensure that these nodes do >>>>> NOT have global scope, i.e. No connection to the Internets >>>>> and no way to attempt DNS resolution. Or they need to ensure that >>>>> DNS resolution occurs after every other “name lookup technology” >>>>> which is not global in scope. >>>> >>>> I don't understand this point. Since Onion hidden service names are >>>> based on hashes derived from public keys surely they're globally scoped >>>> (barring hash collisions)? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Robert Edmonds >>> >>> If they _are_ globally scoped, what part of the local system decides which >>> namespace to use, the ONION, the LOCAL, the P2P, the BIT, the BBSS, the >>> DECnetV, the IXP, or the DNS… >>> where is search order determined? Does first match in any namespace win? >>> What is the tiebreaker when there are label collisions between namespaces? >>> >>> >>> /bill >> >> _______________________________________________ >> DNSOP mailing list >> DNSOP@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > > > > -- > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > idea in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > of pants. > ---maf > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
