On May 17, 2011, at 6:09 PM, Scott Weeks wrote: > --- joe...@bogus.com wrote: > From: Joel Jaeggli <joe...@bogus.com> > On May 17, 2011, at 4:30 PM, Scott Brim wrote: >> On May 17, 2011 6:26 PM, <valdis.kletni...@vt.edu> wrote: >>> On Tue, 17 May 2011 15:04:19 PDT, Scott Weeks said: >>> >>>> What about privacy concerns >>> >>> "Privacy is dead. Get used to it." -- Scott McNeely >> >> Forget that attitude, Valdis. Just because privacy is blown at one level >> doesn't mean you give it away at every other one. We establish the framework >> for recovering privacy and make progress step by step, wherever we can. >> Someday we'll get it all back under control. > > if you put something in the dns you do so because you want to discovered. > scoping the nameservers such that they only express certain certain resource > records to queriers in a particular scope is fairly straight forward. > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > The article was not about DNS. It was about "Persistent Personal Names for > Globally Connected Mobile Devices" where "Users normally create personal > names by introducing devices locally, on a common WiFi network for example. > Once created, these names remain persistently bound to their targets as > devices move. Personal names are intended to supplement and not replace > global DNS names."
you mean like mac addresses? those have a tendency to follow you around in ipv6... > I see a lot of folks on lists designing future networks where an identifier > follows you everywhere and we as operators will have to deal with a public > hostile to the idea of being followed. It's happening now. Just read all > the articles on privacy lost. It's not going to go away. People like their > privacy whether they're doing bad things or not. > > scott >
