Karl and all,
Very good points here Karl with respect to why multiple roots
are not widely accepted, yet. However I think that there is huge
pent up demand for multiple roots. We have seen this on
extranet and intrAnet perspective for going on 3 years now.
To me anyway, FWIW is that there has been insufficient
Marketing $$ allocated to promoting multiple Roots. This is
soon to be coming to and end however....
Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > But I said "direct themselves to any DNS server," not "direct themselves to
> > any root server." Aren't we agreeing that any intermediary can set up a
> > DNS resolver, which in turn gets its info from any root server it chooses,
> > and then consumers can point to whatever intermediaries they please. And
> > Richard Sexton has written an app to make it as easy as a click for
> > consumers to choose.
>
> Yes, it is easy for most end-users to repoint his/her individual computer
> to use any intermediary server/resolver that one choses (absent firewall
> considerations that force one to use a particular intermediary inside the
> firewall.)
>
> Some "operating systems" tend to require a reboot to do this unless one
> uses some non-OS-vendor software to do the switch.
>
> Thus, as you say, for me as an individual to use a particular DNS resolver
> (and hence by indirect reference) a particular root server system, I would
> need to re-aim my personal computer to an intermediary server that, in
> turn, uses the root system I want to use.
>
> Most people who use ISP services or who live in organizations have this
> information configured for them, so, they could be re-aimed en-masse by
> the ISP or organization should that ISP or organization chose to use a new
> root system.
>
> But suppose I were a member of a community of some sort (a church for
> example), I could easily set up such an intermediary DNS server and send
> to my members by e-mail or otherwise the steps to switch to that
> intermediary.
>
> This may not be best in terms of the network traffic matrix, but there are
> always some prices that we pay for flexibility.
>
>
> > So what's stopping market forces, as you say, from creating the nicely
> > nested (but still not completely overlapping) competitive set of DNS
> > services? I'd imagine only the market itself so far--which has been known
> > to miss good opportunities in the space, to be sure. ...JZ
>
> There's a couple of reasons why multiple root systems have not really
> happened in any big way, yet.
>
> (I might note that I have heard that some of the larger providers and
> corporations do actually run their own root systems, but that they are
> exact mimics of the "legacy" root system and are there to prevent
> reflecting NSI-derived problems onto their customer/employee base.)
>
> Here's my list of reasons:
>
> - The current root system has worked reasonably well so far.
> (Although if one looks at the talk on NANOG today, there are a
> lot of reports of NSI foul-ups, but those are in the TLDs, not
> the root zone.) So theres a strong, but diminishing, feeling of
> "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"
>
> - There has been a technical and personal prejudice against
> multiple roots. Those who have suggested it have been belittled
> by some.
>
> - There is a fear of network instability. There is technical
> basis for these fears. (Although in my mind people ought to be
> more afraid of our Internet routing systems creating unreachable
> areas as peering/transit arrangements get more complicated.)
>
> The issue is how much fear is reasonable fear. To me, this is
> where the main part of the dissussion needs to happen.
>
> - There is a concern (in my mind at least) of the potential of ISC
> changing the BIND [the most common form of DNS server] license or code
> to restrict the creation of multiple root systems.
>
> - Few have yet thought of using a root system as an entrapreneural
> vehicle.
>
> - There have been many eminations from NTIA and ICANN through the
> last couple of years that there is and shall be but one and only
> one "authoritative" root system. By implication, all other root
> systems would not be "authoritative", an untrue statement.
>
> In other words, most of the hesitation has been mental/attitudinal rather
> than technical.
>
> --karl--
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
