Re: Alternic.net (was domain zapping)
John Fricker writes:
At 05:54 AM 6/26/96 -0400, Perry wrote: [...regarding alternte registries...]
They can offer to sell you anything they like, of course, and you can pay them, but you don't get anything at all for the money. Domains registered with them don't appear in the real DNS.
What constitutes "real DNS"?
For 99.99999% of the Internet "real DNS" is defined by the root server list distributed with the most recent version of BIND.
DNS server administrators need only add one line to their named.boot file to resolve .nic hosts.
secondary nic 204.94.42.1 db.nic
It's that easy!
Sorry, but this only gives you domain name resolution for the .nic TLD, not the other new top-level domains they want to create or any domains that alternic is proposing to provide service for. To do that one needs to add an appropriate line into the root.cache file (or whatever the root server list is in your name server setup), at which point you are also trusting alternic with pointing you properly to any domain they get queried on.
The concept of centralized name resolutions is flawed and only exists out of habit.
It is not just about habit, it is also about trust. There are alternatives, but they need to be thought-out much more than this alternic stuff... jim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, Jim McCoy wrote:
John Fricker writes:
DNS server administrators need only add one line to their named.boot file to resolve .nic hosts.
secondary nic 204.94.42.1 db.nic
It's that easy!
Sorry, but this only gives you domain name resolution for the .nic TLD, not the other new top-level domains they want to create or any domains that alternic is proposing to provide service for. To do that one needs to add an appropriate line into the root.cache file (or whatever the root server list is in your name server setup), at which point you are also trusting alternic with pointing you properly to any domain they get queried on.
A better way is to add the nameserver data file distributed by alternic and adding it to primary nameserver data. The file that the alternic distributes does not have any root level servers defined (except the ones distributed by the Internic) so there isn't much trust involved.
The concept of centralized name resolutions is flawed and only exists out of habit.
It is not just about habit, it is also about trust. There are alternatives, but they need to be thought-out much more than this alternic stuff...
I don't see trust as being much of a factor on the user-end. The only people that really need to trust alternic are the people who have domain names registered with them. If the alternic starts screwing with its nameserver data, this will just cause them a severe loss of reputation without any gain. - -- Mark =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= markm@voicenet.com | finger -l for PGP key 0xe3bf2169 http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ | d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348 "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." --George Orwell, _1984_ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBMdHtXrZc+sv5siulAQE+vwP9GXJFC5YOpSgLCYW2hLklljC6IYJfyYSP QZDBoDdPgWjVzgCIx8v2XEyTxd7GSoGZHVk8eYy8lqsKRGBVaXoAJhSGHu2RQnGv 5DW6kFE0/CcsDhYbgcqzoHSdNb67elT8Nei/bUanSXRIkBgXA2bC0VEF0/pGeGtW Xd0zrZLtPnY= =Xids -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (2)
-
Mark M. -
mccoy＠communities.com