On Nov 9, 2009, at 3:00 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
i loved the henry ford analogy -- but i think henry ford would have
said that
the automatic transmission was a huge step forward since he wanted
everybody
to have a car. i can't think of anything that's happened in the
automobile
market that henry ford wouldn't've wished he'd thought of.
i knew that the "incoherent DNS" market would rise up on its hind
legs and
say all kinds of things in its defense against the ACM Queue
article, and i'm
not going to engage with every such speaker.
Paul: I completely agree with you that putting wildcards into the
roots, GTLDs, CCTLDs, etc. is a Bad Idea and should be squashed.
Users have little (no?) choice on their TLDs. Stopping those is a
Good Thing, IMHO.
However, I own a domain (or couple hundred :). I have a wildcard on
my domain. I point it where I want. I feel not the slightest twinge
of guilt at this. Do you think this is a Bad Thing, or should this be
allowed?
Also, why are you upset at OpenDNS. People _intentionally_ select to
use OpenDNS, which is clear in its terms of service, and even allows
users to turn off the bits that annoy you. Exactly what is the issue?
And lastly, DNS is not "truth". DNS is the Domain Name System, it is
what people configure it to be. You yourself have argued things like
responding with "192.0.2.1" for DNSBLs that are being shut down.
That is clearly NOT "truth".
--
TTFN,
patrick
P.S. Yes, I am intentionally ignoring the CDN side of things. Find me
in private, preferably with a shot of single-malt, if you want my
opinion.
there three more-specific replies below.
Dave Temkin <dav...@gmail.com> writes:
Alex Balashov wrote:
For example, perhaps in the case of CDNs geographic optimisation
should
be in the province of routing (e.g. anycast) and not DNS?
In most cases it already is. He completely fails to address the
concept
of Anycast DNS and assumes people are using statically mapped
resolvers.
"anycast DNS" appears to mean different things to different people.
i didn't
mention it because to me anycast dns is a bgp level construct
whereby the
same (coherent) answer is available from many servers having the
same IP
address but not actually being the same server. see for example how
several
root name servers are distributed. <http://www.root-servers.org/>.
if you
are using "anycast DNS" to mean carefully crafted (noncoherent)
responses
from a similarly distributed/advertised set of servers, then i did
address
your topic in the ACM Queue article.
David Andersen <d...@cs.cmu.edu> writes:
This myth ... was debunked years ago:
"DNS Performance and the Effectiveness of Caching"
Jaeyeon Jung, Emil Sit, Hari Balakrishnan, and Robert Morris
http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/dns:ton.pdf
my reason for completely dismissing that paper at the time it came
out was
that it tried to predict the system level impact of DNS caching
while only
looking at the resolver side and only from one client population
having a
small and uniform user base. show me a "trace driven simulation" of
the
whole system, that takes into account significant authority servers
(which
would include root, tld, and amazon and google) as well as significant
caching servers (which would not include MIT's or any university's but
which would definitely include comcast's and cox's and att's), and
i'll
read it with high hopes. note that ISC SIE (see http://sie.isc.org/
may
yet grow into a possible data source for this kind of study, which
is one
of the reasons we created it.)
Simon Lyall <si...@darkmere.gen.nz> writes:
I heard some anti-spam people use DNS to distribute big databases of
information. I bet Vixie would have nasty things to say to the guy
who
first thought that up.
someone made this same comment in the slashdot thread. my response
there
and here is: the MAPS RBL has always delivered coherent responses
where the
answer is an expressed fact, not kerned in any way based on the
identity of
the querier. perhaps my language in the ACM Queue article was
imprecise
("delivering facts rather than policy") and i should have stuck with
the
longer formulation ("incoherent responses crafted based on the
identity of
the querier rather than on the authoritative data").
--
Paul Vixie
KI6YSY
