Re: Multiple Roots simply need context

["James M. Shuler III" <jshuler () cfl rr com>]

Wouldn't a context just be another root? Who then controls what context's
are valid and who's context server is right?

James

----- Original Message -----
From: "Timothy R. McKee" <trm3 () nuvox net>
To: <nanog () merit edu>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 4:14 PM
Subject: RE: Multiple Roots simply need context


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The day that I have to start asking John Doe User questions like this is
the
> day I move back into systems programming, writing device drivers is much
> less of a headache.  I can just see the vendors ads now...  go to
> http://www.abbey.shop (if you are new.net context) or http://www.abby.shop
> (if you are in mynew.net context).  If this happens most of our normal
user
> base will begin leaving in droves.  (Count LOST REVENUE...  LOST JOBS...
> PROBABLY MINE!!)
>
> This is not an academic exercise.  This has become a business catering to
> ordinary people that are NOT computer/network wizards.  The minute we
start
> to require our users to make informed complicated decisions we will begin
to
> loose them all.
>
> In the telco world this would be the equivalent of a telco subscribing to
> one of several SS7 providers - each with overlapping SS7 point codes (this
> is the telephony routing table).
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of
> > Chris Davis
> > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 15:24
> > To: 'nanog () merit edu'
> > Subject: Multiple Roots simply need context
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > There is no problem in having hundreds or thousands of multiple
> > root servers
> > for DNS.
> >
> > We have a problem with CONTEXT.  There is no existing way to ascertain
the
> > context from which users are resolving domain names.
> >
> > Solution:  DNS Context Servers...  DNS operators subscribe their
> > machines to
> > the DNS context they want.  In one context, ".xxx" can resolve
> > via new.net,
> > in another context, ".xxx" resolves via one of the other .xxx
> > providers.  To
> > keep ICANN and friends happy, ICANN could be the "default" context.
> >
> > Help calls then have one and only one additional question:  "To which
DNS
> > context do you subscribe?"
> >
> > Context servers are pretty obviously where things are headed.  Sooner or
> > later, some new.net company is going to "take."  If we already have DNS
> > context servers in place, life will be much easier when an alternative
TLD
> > provider does succeed.
> >
> > -Chris Davis
> > --not really selling private address space, that was a joke
> > --not a fan of new.net's plugin, since it breaks ping, traceroute, and
> > tradition
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
>
> iQA/AwUBOrZ2mxRIXzEQLahvEQK6uACgguSOXWRJtxv9wQrc4YZeHZ88nggAn1Qc
> urxnAGjLYlh9AIq6p/yDNPzB
> =A9Dr
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----