At 20:05 02.12.99 -0500, Peter Deutsch wrote:
>My question is still there - is the current mission critical nature of
>the simple DNS name->IP address lookup service having a chilling effect
>on innovation in DNS technology?
Definitely. And that's a sign of sanity.
> The fact that people have proposed
>other services based upon this technology and they haven't flown may
>actually be a sign of that chilling effect, or it may just be a
>commentary on the services proposed. I don't pretend to know the answer
>to that, but given how often I've heard "the DNS is mission critical and
>can't be changed if it breaks the core service" I would prefer at least
>to have a "test tree" for exploring outlandish ideas. My own solution
>was to set up and experiment with independent roots, but can this work
>in a global Internet context? If I talk about multiple roots I suspect
>I'm liable to be tarred with a couple of pretty messy brushes.
Yes.
OTOH, nobody stops you from running a set of DNS servers on port 53000,
with resolvers in the applications configured to match.
Guaranteed noninterference.
Harald A
>I do think there's an issue here, but don't know how to broach it
>without appearing to be taking sides in the ICANN wars...
>
> - peterd
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "In other news tonight, General Franco is still dead"
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>-
>This message was passed through [EMAIL PROTECTED], which
>is a sublist of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not all messages are passed.
>Decisions on what to pass are made solely by Harald Alvestrand.
--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
