nanog mailing list archives
Re: Statements against new.net?
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 03:54:28 -0500
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:14:50 PST, Mike Batchelor <mikebat () tmcs net> said:
Yes it is a value judgement. He has determined that the problem is insoluble. It isn't. And we don't have to abandon DNS as the nameservice
and also
Well DUH! I totally agree that conflicting roots break things. But I don't think that conflicting roots is an inevitable consequence of having multiple roots, or even multiple root zones.
So which is it? If conflicting roots break things, then the problem *is* insoluble. Remember that RFC2826 only discusses the issue of conflicting roots - there's no technical reason not to hand-wave and aggregate all identical roots under one "naming authority" (totally unspecified - it's *WHATEVER METHOD* got all the identical roots to *be* identical, even if it was 5 kegs of beer at a trade show ;) Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
Current thread:
- Re: Statements against new.net?, (continued)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Havard Eidnes (Mar 13)
- RE: Statements against new.net? Roeland Meyer (Mar 13)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 13)
- RE: Statements against new.net? Mike Batchelor (Mar 13)
- RE: Statements against new.net? David R. Conrad (Mar 13)
- RE: Statements against new.net? Mathias Koerber (Mar 13)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Clayton Fiske (Mar 14)
- RE: Statements against new.net? Mike Batchelor (Mar 14)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Clayton Fiske (Mar 14)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Eric A. Hall (Mar 14)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 13)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 14)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Hank Nussbacher (Mar 14)
- Re: Statements against new.net? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 13)