On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 12:39:59PM -0500,
Emin Gun Sirer <egs(_at_)systems(_dot_)cs(_dot_)cornell(_dot_)edu> wrote
a message of 99 lines which said:
the name hierarchy and the server hierarchy are intertwined. This
leads to a natural monopoly. Suppose you want a .COM name, but also
want to boycott VeriSign over SiteFinder?
You are playing with words. CoDoNS separates name service and name
delegation but there is still a monopoly on the name delegation, which
is the important stuff.
- With CoDoNS+DNSSEC, the natural namespace monopoly is gone.
False. CoDoNS does not magically allow me to register microsoft.com
and have it distributed to the world.
Naturally, R1 and R2 will have to cooperate to not issue conflicting
bindings for the same name.
That's the problem with most "one namespace, several registries"
proposals. There is still a registry to coordinate the so-called
"several registries" so you're back to step 1.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf