Re: new.net: yet another dns namespace overlay play

[Greg Rumple <grumple () zaphon llamas net>]

* Kevin Loch (kloch () opnsys com) [010306 21:42]:
> Actually they are not just subdomains of new.net.  What it looks like
> is an attempt to make the UltraDNS network the new root.

Actually, I don't believe it is.  By looking at the new.net web page
under the ISP configuration page, you will see the following.

ftp://ftp.New.net/domain/bind/named.cache
-----------------------------------------
;
.                       3600000         IN      NS
ns1.newdotnet.net.
ns1.newdotnet.net.      3600000         IN      A       206.132.100.43
;
.                       3600000         IN      NS
ns2.newdotnet.net.
ns2.newdotnet.net.      3600000         IN      A       64.209.213.126
;
.                       3600000         IN      NS
ns3.newdotnet.net.
ns3.newdotnet.net.      3600000         IN      A       209.151.233.13
;
; End of File

This is new.net's proposed root zone hint file to use in place of the
standard root hint file.  These 3 servers are not operated by UltraDNS.
2 of them are on Idealab operated IP space, with the third being on
Cyberverse IP space (according to the arin whois database).

If you do query these root servers (which run bind 9.1.0), you will find
the normal root delegations, as well as delegations for the new.net
TLD's.  The new.net TLD's are delegated to UltraDNS operated servers.

> udns1.ultradns.net returns an A record for pie.shop just like
> udns1.newdotnet.net.

It also returns the same A record for pie.shop.new.net.

> I suspect that all UltraDNS servers return queries for these alternate
> TLD's.

I suspect that right now you are correct.

> The more I look at this the more it looks like an good old fasioned
> root hijack.  The difference this time is they already have the
> network of servers, and they already have some ISPs lined up.

I don't believe their intentions are to hijack.

> I'm not passing judgement on wether it's good or not, but let's call
> it as it is.
>
> KL
>
> Joe Provo wrote:
> > not actually adding any new TLDs? Aside from the misrepresentation
> > of it being anythign other than subdomains in their zone, it is a
> > good thing.  Of course, that misrepresentation is slimy, will cause
> > confusion if and when any of those *.new.net zones match new TLDs,
> > and is the hallmark of shysters. I think the comments about EK and
> > Balkanizing are spot on, but the only tell half the story; this is
> > also about duping of the masses at the end of the pipe.

-- 
Greg Rumple
grumple () zaphon llamas net