Re: Question for DNS propronents?

Keith Moore (moore@cs.utk.edu)
Thu, 15 Jun 1995 01:05:22 -0400


Message-Id: <199506150505.BAA22451@wilma.cs.utk.edu>
From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
To: Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu (Michael Mealling)
Cc: uri@bunyip.com, moore@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Question for DNS propronents? 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 14 Jun 1995 13:34:37 EDT."
             <199506141734.NAA16397@oit.gatech.edu> 
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 01:05:22 -0400

> How do you deal with information spaces and server hierarchies that
> don't correspond to actual DNS name/server hierarchies?

One way is to define them in other places under the DNS root.  There's
no particular reason that your naming authority name has to be in the
same DNS subtree as your host names.  And if you want your URNs to
last awhile, there's good reasons not to do this.

There are about three separate questions to "should we use DNS"?

1) should we use the existing DNS hierarchy?
   (e.g. we could restrict all URN naming authorities to a particular
    subtree of DNS, or we could define one or more new subtrees for 
    "persistent" URN naming authorities, while allowing people to
    use any DNS name if they want to)

2) should we use DNS query protocols?
   if we don't like the way dns exposes its naming hierarchy, 
   (i.e. that the resolution hierarchy is inseperably wired into
   the dns name) we can build our own DNS servers for particular
   subtrees of DNS name space and they can resolve names any way
   they want to (like iddd.tpc.int)

3) should we use DNS servers?
   if named isn't reliable enough or secure enough or doesn't
   permit the kind of updating needed by a particular naming
   authority, they can build their own servers.

To DNS or not to DNS?
I'm still not sure which approach is best, but I haven't seen
any objection to DNS that can't be dealt with.

Keith