ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-roots]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga-roots] Re: [icann-eu] Letter to Dr. Vint Cerf





On 10 May 2001, at 0:09, List Admin wrote:

> [Repost upon request from Patrick Corliss - this message had
> originally been distributed on icann-europe. Note that I'm not
> subscribed to ga-roots. Please CC me on any replies.
>
> What a chaos. -tlr]
>
> On 2001-05-08 13:24:23 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
>
> > The misconfiguration is in creation of a .biz in an alternate
> > root system, and connecting that to the global Internet -- an
> > action which exposes one to all kinds of problems, not just the
> > one you outline.
>
> I disagree.
>
> The interesting question about Jefsey's scenario is how the message
> gets to a mail server which uses the wrong root system - from the
> sender's point of view. (The argument is entirely symmetric under
> exchange of canonical and alternative roots.)
>

Canonical meaning what? The orthodox view of the DoC controlled rootzone? You are forgetting that education is working and a paradigm shift is beginning. What is considered canonical today may be quite different tomorrow.

Put quite simply, it is the duplication of a TLD that is the crux of the issue, not which root is used. No collision, no problem.

Leah

> 1. The sender himself may have delivered the message to a relay
> (smart host) which uses the wrong set of root servers. In this
> case, the user has either acted in a pretty stupid way, or he erred
> on which root server is used by his preferred smart host. Thinking
> about a typical ISP setup, an Internet service provider may indeed
> turn out to be liable when he is using the alternative root and
> customers expect (as usual) that the canonical set of root servers
> is used.
>
> 2. A server using the wrong set of root servers is acting as an MX
> for the target domain, as seen in the right DNS hierarchy. That is,
> things are setup very badly. This would most likely count as a
> severe configuration error, and is something which should be sorted
> out between the owner of the target domain and the MX operator. It
> basically just doesn't make any sense.
>
>
> Thus, I don't think that connecting name servers with an alternative
> root zone to the Internet is the really bad thing - but actually
> using them may quickly turn out to be a very bad thing.

Duplication is the bad thing.

>
> --
> Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.org/
>
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>


-- This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list. Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message). Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>