On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, J. Baptista wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Joseph Friedman wrote:
> >
> > > So anytime a root server is added or moved (and its IP# changes) the only
> > > for all the DNS servers worldwide to know of the change(s) is to manually
> > > update the list?
> >
> > Yup, or as richard said - if they upgrade bind - so do they upgrade the
> > root cache.
> >
> > Sounds like something the anti rackets people would be interested in.
> > Does it not. Microsoft may run the worlds OS, but Vixie controls the root
> > cache.
>
> Vixie does not "control the root cache." Vixie controls the root cache on
> a single root(which I believe is also a SLD) server.
Vixie controls the distribution of the root cache file that comes with
BIND. He also controls the BIND readmes. If Vixie does not educate
the users of the product and provide them with option or
alternatives, then those users will never know the alternative exists.
>
> > Mr. Vixie should make it quite clear that there are options.
>
> He is under no obligation to do so, and further, why would he? To date, I
Your absolutly right. He has no obligation whatsoever to educate the
community. As I said the distribution of a fixed root cache with BIND is
a bit of an anti rackets game, but that legality I leave to others to
test.
Now why would he want to let his users know they have options? I feel
that if Vixies users are imporant to Vixie, then by default an educated
consumer base is invaluable.
> haven't seen any truly viable alternatives and I've looked. If I
> were to hazard a guess, he hasn't either. So, why mention something that
> to you(options) don't exist?
>
> It is als important to stress that viability encompasses much more than
> throwing up a bunch of boxes wherever and calling them "root servers." To
> date, and I'll doubtlessly get flamed for saying this, all the attempts I
> have witnessed at alternative root servers have consisted of little more
> than this. No serious financial backing, no production-grade management/
> syncranization, no serious marketing(by professionals), no serious buy-in.
I agree. The attempts at establishing alternate root-service that I have
seen have nothing whatsoever to do with reality. I agree, almost all are
under capitalized, they have no marketing techniques to speak of, yada
yada yada ...
But regardless of the obvious drawbacks - competition is competition.
Alternative roots do exist and they work. Now if they can get their
marketing and finances co-ordinated, who knows what will happen.
> > But as has been mentioned before on these lists - vixie is sponsored by
> > the very people who run the roots,
>
> Vixie *is* one of the people who runs the roots, and if I am not
> mistaken(which is possible) I don't believe any of the root
> server operators are compensated for running those servers. They do so as
> a service to the Internet community.
>
> Perhaps you could tell us who exactly runs the various root servers and in
> what fashion they "sponsor" Vixie since you make the claim that they are
> doing so.
I didn't make that claim. The claim was established in a prior tread by
someone who was arguing Vixie was an activist and later admitted Vixie was
like everyone else a victim of the money trail.
Vixie is aware of these conferences, so if he's like to address the
sponsorship issue, let him. If were wrongm, then Mr. Vixie like any other
human has the capacity to stand up and address the issue himself. So I
leave it to him to correct us.
Cheers
Joe Baptista
--
Planet Communication & Computing Facility 212.894.3704 x1033
Public Access Internet Research Publisher 419.821.8581 fax
Centro Planetario de Communicaciones y Computacion 888.830.5744 x3223
