Re: DNS: Which are the core things that matter?

Re: DNS: Which are the core things that matter?

From: Adam Todd <at§>
Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 12:40:58 +1000
At 01:07 15/05/98 +1000, you wrote:
>As a silly old duffer

Don't know about that - haven't met you :)

>I've been pretty confused about the administration of
>the dns since Geoff et al tried to sort out .au some years ago which in
>retrospect I see as an attempt to avoid the imbroglio in which we now find

We only find oursevles at the AU level in the same situation that has been
brewing in the USA for over 2 years.  We are just six months behind it.

Join the DOMAIN POLICY mail list at Internet and really get involved.  It's
a higher level of debate, with a huge amount of input and two leading

Here there are a dozen factions of which most can't ACT, they just talk.

I'm not refering to Geoff H and Robert Elz, they are what we term "Legacy"
and in a very difficult position.  If they hand any authority over they
might in fact be in breach of the Trade Practices Act.  If they don't, they
might also be in breach, but not as likely.

Then there is ADNA who talk and don't act.  One example set in the USA (and
by myself) was to not hang around waiting for someone to hand us a silver
spoon.  It was to ACT and set up resources.  RSC's have more credability
now than they did 6 months ago and most didn't official decalre themselves
so much back then.  They just existed in some form or other.

Now they are proefssionally run organisations, either commercial or
sponsored by their members.

And the gTLD/IAHC/CORE is not really much different to ADNA.

>ourselves. I guess that they would not have been so pessimistic as to have
>projected what transpired. New on this list I'm probably venturing into
>well swum waters so get your delete keys ready

No, you need educating.  Start at and make your OWN
decision.  But I strongly advise that before you jump on the "It's a fake"
and "it's invisbvle" bandwagon - you ACTUALLY point your "personal DNS
server" to the AURSC servers and see how fake and fragmented it really is.

If yo ucan show me any names that resovle in the legacy DNS that do not
resolve in AURSC DNS I'll send you $10.

>Somehow a useful technique to match mnemonic names to non-memorable numbers
>has become a war of trademarks through the assignment of exclusive semantic
>meaning, to com, edu etc.

Yep. Because names are profit in the 90's.

>The costs of maintaining dns servers become
>confused with the market value which a semantically constrained space
>provides to its owner.

The cost varies greatly depending on where the servers are located.  I'm
sure MIT do NOT PAY the AVCC for the hosting of COM.AU.  I'm still waiting
for MIT to make a statement on that matter.

>If instead of * * * * etc the choice had been
>made to have * * * and so on to * there would
>have been little to argue about. You would have chosen whatever three

Not true.  There would have been aaa-zzz times as much to argue about,
because you would have to register your name in EVERY SLD to "protect it",
at least that's what people keep telling me.

I keep saying - choose your domain name based on quality of service,
performance and what you want to do.

>letter group you wanted (OK there would have been BHP, ICI etc etc but at
>least no four letter words!).


Must avoid PIZZA in Turkmanistan.

>The argument and passions seem to be about commercial value of holding
>potentially exclusive trademark territory. Destroy that and the argument
>drops to one of commercial reality - providing a service at a competitive
>price. The easist way to do that is to multiply the places such a name can
>be and blur its meaning and exclusivity.

You can't make a Domain Name non exclusive.  It doesn't work.  Although the
gTLD/CORE mob feel they can and will conflict with any TLD they feel like -
on what servers remains to be seen.

Competition won't commence in COM.AU and NET.AU whilst two commercial
entities are in full control and the only person who can order that
competition, by way of legacy authority, won't do it.

Robert Elz could say - HERE IS THE POLICY.  You guys MAKE it work. And
leave commercial reality to itself.  Whilst he wishes to maintain control
of the WAY IT WORKS, nothing will happen because there is too much
contraversy over it now.

>In all areas of technical skill there are licensing provisions before you
>can set up. So running a dns server fits into patterns we already have. Get
>accredited and then you can do it.

Accredited by WHOM?  I've been running DNS servers for 8 years?  I even
tested one of the earliest versions of Bind. 

Does Paul Vixie have to do the accreditations?  Or ISC?  

Does that mean for an ISP to run a DNS server they also have to be
accredited?  Most don't know how to do it and fewer obtaining any form of
technical training.

>Some models assuming is the problem (Is any other area??)
>1. Abolish * and replace it by any number of *.com\d\d\

OUCH.  Why not abolish AU and start afresh?

>2. Add the series of *, *, etc - the more the merrier

Oh gawd.  Here we go again.  And then people who want to "protect" their
name or are naive will be called upon to register in EVERY DOMAIN. May the
most profitably run SLD be the winner, because revenue will be the market.

What hamburgers do you eat most?

>3. Segment it eg a.*, b.* or in some other way

not really practicle.  Then you have to have everyone point to a dozen
different servers or you end up with the famed fragmentaion.

AURSC has to carry all the legacy data to ensure there is NO fragmentation
and that users can resolve EVERYTHING that exists.

>They are a heap of other even loopier models.

Start listing.  

>While * holds value as an exclusive presence for trademark territory

Not at all.  NET.AU also holds value.  You have missed miles of infromation.

see for some real examples.

>that will conflict in perception and practice with whatever charges are
>made for those assignments while providing a lawyer rich playground as to
>whom the assignments can be assigned to.

Go to the USA for a week.  Right now there are 30 Domain Name cases in trial.

>I think what matters are -
>1 Does it work


>2 Are the people who run the server competent


>3 Are they properly (and I use that word advisedly) funded


Unlike the legacy servers who are all volunteers.

Oh and the AU name servers are provided by the AVCC at this time - at their
expense.  As they don't get paid it wont be long before they say - Going
commercial, find your own servers.

>4 Are the users of the server only dissatisfied to an extent normal in
>everyday transactions

The "users" don't even know they are using Root Servers.  How can they be

>At the moment 1 & 2 are Ok, 3 might be a curate's egg and 4 fails.

Not at all.

>But then I'm not very technical, I don't quite understand how it all works

Clearly.  Visit the sites I suggest, come back and talk with me, I'll
educate you.

>but I tend to trust arguments based on engineering rather than commercial

Great.  Visit AURSC :)

>I'm tired of hearing how *.au is stuffed up when it only seems that people
>are unhappy with *  Hell, any company with half a brain will try

Yes, so am I.  I agree and in all cases no one is really doing anything
other than attacking and counter attacking.  Except me of course and my
6000 supporters.

>and set up internationally in *.com instead of limiting itself to a

They already area and do.  40% of .COM is outside of the USA.

>geographically based domain. And trying to fix * by starting to
>create new entities at a higher level is just making a flatter tree. But
>then does that matter?

Nope of course not.  But you have to remember for every SLD, someone will
want to seel yet another name to someone who already had a name.

The advice offered in this email is not considered professional advice,
or it would be accompanied by an invoice. No permission is granted for 
republication of comments, without written consent.
Business Development, Technology Domain Registration and Network Advisory
Telstra Convey Member			  AURSC
Adam Todd                                 Personal  
at&#167;aus  or				   http://adam.says.sheesh
Phone +61 2 9729 0565                     Network
AU Internet News
AU Internet User Mail List
Received on Fri May 15 1998 - 20:37:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC