Re: Something better than DNS?

What this thread is lacking is:

There is a difference between being a registry and being a DNS operator.

The role of a registry is to associate a resource with a principle. 
Like a domain name with a company. Or range of addresses with a 
person.  Or a value in a protocol field with a semantic.  Or an 
address with a network.  Or a motor vehicle with an owner.  Or a 
company with a tax identifier.  (Registries are not just for the 
Internet.)
The role of a DNS operator is to publish data associated with a 
domain name.  The challenge is to reliably provide the service over 
the unreliable nature that is the Internet.  DNS operations is a 
highly technical job, more so that the legality behind registration. 
Unlike the "market" for registration being beyond the Internet, the 
market for DNS operations is pretty much the IP-connected world 
(okay, not just the Internet, but networks using the same technology 
base until we have DNS over other transports).
When we talk of domain name registries, DNS operations is a component 
of a registry.  DNS operations is not the most important role, 
however, it just seems that way in the IETF environment because DNS 
is the most technically involved component.  WhoIs and EPP are 
child's play compared to DNS, technically.  And the IETF is rather 
oblivious to the billing processes, the name dispute process,  etc.
There are a number of differing models in play for how domain name 
(and other Internet) registries operate.  There is the ICANN shared 
registry model which makes registrars and pre-registrars compete to 
sell services but rely on a central registry.  There is the NRO model 
in which the central registry, IANA, is almost powerless and the five 
Regional Internet Registries duke it out for the honor of delegating 
Internet resources.  (In fact, recently IANA adopted a policy of 
doling out IPv6 addresses in certain sizes via a policy foisted from 
the RIRs to IANA, not from IANA to the RIRs.)  When I say "powerless" 
I mean to draw out that IANA hardly has "monopolistic powers" even 
though they have the pool of resources doled out.
Not all domain name registries operate that same way.  ccTLDs have 
other operating models.  Off-hand I can't give specific examples, but 
I know of ones that don't have registrars, some that offer a 
registrar-of-last-resort, and some that compete alongside the 
registrars.  I mention that because there is now about 5 years of 
history of this kind of market to study, if anyone is concerned about 
whether a "monopoly registry" is an evil thing.
The one weakness I see in the presentation of CoDoNS is one that is 
common amongst academic exercises.  While it treats a technical 
problem in a formally defined say, it suffers from the "assume 
frictional surfaces" syndrome.  This disease is not fatal, it is more 
like the flu, meaning that the work is worthwhile and there are some 
nuggets of real helpful technology, but taken as one package it is no 
better than what is out there today - which does not have to assume 
frictionless surfaces.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Dessert - aka Service Pack 1 for lunch.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf