The DNS problem

[Michael Haffely]

If I may correct a point.  IPv4 and IPv6 development is guided by the
<http://goog_1540818101>Internet Engineering Task
Force<https://www.ietf.org/>(IETF) and many implementations of DNS
either use BIND or mimic the
behavior of BIND  - primarily developed by the Internet Systems
Consortium<https://www.isc.org/>a public 501(c)3 public benefit
corporation.

As Kerry noted, Microsoft, as per the guidelines of those groups, may
submit to the ISC and IETF, they are not in control of neither.

-Mike


On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Carl Smith <lectriclou at hotmail.com> wrote:

>  Thanks Mike,
>
> You're on the right track, But V4 and v6 are MS proprietary and  the
> latter is fully under MS control.  I don't have an answer which solves the
> problem.
>
> Lou
>
> On 8/21/2012 10:46 AM, Michael Haffely wrote:
>
> Under IPv4 that may be true, but under IPv6 all devices may have unique
> identifiers and most of the problems of end-to-end connectivity and are
> removed.
>
>  HTML5's  WEBRTC has some intriguing potential to remove the tyranny of a
> "central point of control"
>
>  -Mike
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Carl Smith <lectriclou at hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>>  The DNS problem and reason for confusion is due to limitations imposed
>> during the infancy of development stages of machine inter-connectivity.
>> Basically, IP is insufficient to grant each machine a unique identity. The
>> limited IP addresses are licensed to master networks which in turn are
>> sub-netted to machines which only have a local identity slaved to the
>> master.
>>
>> Ultimately, we need a unique ID for each machine which is not slaved or
>> controlled by a master. In that case the machines become individual
>> entities. We need a DNS system which recognizes this unique character and
>> allows direct connection between unique entities.
>>
>> This is not what commercial enterprise demands. The corporate entities
>> only have one rule: Profit. This is in direct conflict with individual
>> liberty. A system of controlled connection is the preference of the
>> profiteer. Thus we have our current Internet authority.
>>
>> What we as noncommercial enthusiasts desire is secure open connectivity
>> directly between unique identities which is secure yet unhampered by overt
>> regulation by commercial interest such as corporations which includes
>> government.
>>
>>
>>  Just my thoughts,
>>
>> Lou Smith
>>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20120822/c28265e1/attachment-0001.html>