Re: new port for DNS

Michael Mealling (Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu)
Fri, 16 Jun 1995 09:19:48 -0400 (EDT)


From: Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu (Michael Mealling)
Message-Id: <199506161319.JAA22330@oit.gatech.edu>
Subject: Re: new port for DNS
To: mshapiro@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Michael Shapiro)
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 09:19:48 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: uri@bunyip.com
In-Reply-To: <9506161103.AA19580@void.ncsa.uiuc.edu> from "Michael Shapiro" at Jun 16, 95 06:03:03 am

Michael Shapiro said this:
>    What is the reason for wanting a new port for DNS?   Isn't  it
> enough  to  create  new  top level domains?  Running DNS on a new
> port would mean installing DNS everywhere to run on this new port
> (ie  deploying  a second DNS). It you use an new namespace within
> existing DNS (ie a new top level domain) can't  you  achieve  the
> same effect?

Several reasons:

1. Existing DNS servers are already loaded trying to deal with the existing
namespace. A new port would seperate the load so that if the existing 
DNS space becomes to loaded in the future it does not affect the URN
namespace and vice versa.

2. DNS server trees often do not correspond very well to the trees needed
for information hierarchies. A seperate port would allow the two DNS
trees to coexist but not comingle.

3. DNS servers are optimized for an extremely flat namespace (look at 
all the .com domains with no subdomains). A new namespace could
potentially have a much different organization and hence caching requirments.

4. In order for URNs to be 'public'. I.E. we allow anyone to publish, not
just those that have an in with the system admins; we need the URN 
resolution process to be able to take place on non privilidged ports.

5. It gives us a much much easier upgrade path in the future without
affecting existing systems.

-MM
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life is a game. Someone wins and someone loses. Get used to it.
<BR>
<HR><A HREF="http://www.gatech.edu/michael.html">Michael Mealling</A>