This is the unedited memo on a idea which we developed while working on
multilingual domain names. 

The edited paper will be placed on the Asia Pacific Networking Group
website at      http://www.apng.org/commission/idns/idomain/msoa.html
when it is ready.

Constructive feedback, flames, criticism will be welcome.

James Seng
Software Engineer
BioInformatix Pte Ltd

--- CUT HERE ---
Title: Is it possible to de-monopolize DNS?
Date : 3rd Jan 1998, draft-1

Authors
Mr James SENG Ching Hong <[EMAIL PROTECTED])
Dr TAN Tin Wee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Contributors

1. Introduction

Domain Name System or DNS is a distributed/hierarchy name spaces system,
with hierarchy roughly corresponding to organizational structure and names
using "." as the character to mark the boundary between hierarchy levels.
(Readers are presumed to understand how DNS works. Please refer to RFC1034 
and RFC1035 for further information).

The nature of DNS is that each organization is given a delegation of
the start of authority (SOA) of its domain name space. It is the 
responsibility of each SOA to maintains the domain name space and
they can sub-delegation part of its name space to another SOA.

At the top-level domain (TLD) before the organization name space, similar 
delegation is been deployed. TLD is usually control by a network information 
center (NIC) at common level or at country NIC level. The root of the
hierarchy of DNS is hold by ICANN. (Although the authority of ICANN is of
dubious level, it is not the purpose of this memo to discuss this.)

Hence, the nature of the DNS protocol encourages a monopoly structure.
Each SOA is essentially a monopoly of its own domain name space. At a 
organization level, this is understandable since each organization would 
like to have control over its own name space. However, at the TLD each 
NIC is given monopoly of the whole branch of name space.  While this 
is technical sound, when a NIC commercializes, it become questionable 
that should such monopoly structure remains?

This memo aims to de-monopolizing the DNS by proposing a Multiple Start
of Authority system.

2. Multiple Start of Authority

The basic concept of multiple start of authority (MSOA) is relatively
simple. Instead of delegating one domain sub-space to one authority,
the delegation is given to a few parties. Of course, this does not
applies when delegating SOA for an organization.

The implementation of MSOA can be done via two ways:
1. Organization changes
2. Technical implementations

2.1 Organization changes

It is generally believe that the current DNS is unable to cope with more
than one SOA. That is generally quite true from a technical point of view.
Nevertheless, it is still possible for more than one party to hold authority 
of a domain space if some co-operation is been done.

When delegating a SOA of a domain space, one more level of authority below
the SOA is assigned known as registrar. Been a registrar of a SOA allows full
access to the zone files of that domain space. A simple system like FTP could
be use to grant such access. Alternatively, a more complex auditing system
could be design via CGI/HTML such that each registrar would be able to create,
modify and delete entries within its own control and the system would generate
a new zone file after each updates.  The cost of operation of the SOA could 
be shared among the registrar.

Thus, by doing so, all registrar would be granted equal opportunity and if
domain space is been sold, free market will prevail thus breaking the 
monopoly enforced by the DNS protocols.

2.2 Technical implementations

Alternative way of implementing MSOA could be done by modify DNS servers
and perhaps its protocols. There are several ways which this could be
done and we shall discuss a few method for consideration.

Theoretically, the current DNS protocol is able to handle MSOA despite
it was not actually designed for it. This could be done crudely by:

1. When delegating a MSOA for a domain space, list all the name servers of
   all the multiple start of authority in the zone files. For example,
 
   .COM         IN      NS      111.111.111.100         ; SOA 1
                IN      NS      111.111.111.101         ; SOA 1
                IN      NS      222.222.222.100         ; SOA 2
                IN      NS      222.222.222.101         ; SOA 2

2. The name servers of each MSOA has to modify such that when it receives
   a DNS query within its own zone, it only replies to the query if it
   hold an entry for the zone.

Thus, when a resolver sends a query and there is no response from the
server after a few retries, it will move onto the next server and so on
until an answer is found.

Of course, this is extremely inefficient and a long query time is expected
as the resolver try one server and another. Nevertheless, this is 
compatibility with all the current resolvers.

This could be improve if resolvers would send out multiple queries to
all the name server at the same time.

Alternatively, a new Response Code, RCODE could be implemented in the
DNS protocol which is similar to RCODE 3 (Name Error) but contain 
additional information on where to find possible authoritative answer 
from.

3. Issue to be address in future drafts
o Consistency of name space data
o Name space poisoning
o Multiple Authority


__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________

Reply via email to