5 ms·

Yeah, because I want to have to mine a token every time I update my DNS settings. -_- I get the "global, transparent, append only log" appeal, but for the real

by mugsie 7y ago

Yeah, because I want to have to mine a token every time I update my DNS settings. -_- I get the "global, transparent, append only log" appeal, but for the reality of most people, I don't want to rely on a blockchain converging, or processing my update in a certain amount of time. And that doesn't even cover companies (I don't agree with this, but it is a reality), that consider DNS entries private, and don't want to expose an easily scannable list of DNS entries .

rasengan 7y ago
You don’t need to store the zone on chain - you can actually simply include NS records and have your authoritative server elsewhere - just like DNS today!
- mugsie 7y ago
  then I don't see the point, other than a set of tlds that half the people in the world won't be able to access ...
  - rasengan 7y ago
    The DNS ROOT becomes controlled by the people instead of ICANN - it’s the end of ceased and censored domains. Additionally, HNS also fixes the problems the CA system has today. CAs can generate certificates for any domain - even if the domain owner didn’t request it. This has led to countless occurrences of abuse.
    - mugsie 7y ago
      > The DNS ROOT becomes controlled by the people instead of ICANN - it’s the end of ceased and censored domains. Good luck with that. If there is no way to have a US court take ownership of a domain (or force someone to handover a bad faith registration), someone will either end up in jail for contempt, or it will just be banned. > Additionally, HNS also fixes the problems the CA system has today. CAs can generate certificates for any domain - even if the domain owner didn’t request it. This has led to countless occurrences of abuse. It fixes the non EV cert situation (kind of - CAA records also help this, and work on the standard internet), but doesn't fix EV certs (i.e. amzon.tld is actually Amazon LLC and not Scammers R Us Ltd.) It also ignores the reality of most major companies in the world MITM'ing all outbound traffic from offices to ensure sensitive content is not exfilled from the company - there is 0 chance of them allowing traffic out that they could not MITM.
      - crediblewitness 7y ago
        > Good luck with that. If there is no way to have a US court take ownership of a domain (or force someone to handover a bad faith registration), someone will either end up in jail for contempt, or it will just be banned. This same argument applies to bitcoin and it has not (yet) been banned in much of the free world.
        mugsie 7y ago
        We don't see them trying to change anything on the chain with bitcoin - just trace people (and law enforcement has gotten pretty good at that to be fair). They seize wallets from people they arrest, like normal cash / assets, or get a court order to get companies holding the coin to hand them over, if the accused used a hosted wallet.
        crediblewitness 7y ago
        it would work exactly the same then: taking ownership of the handshake private key by which the registration means you control that name.
      - justinmchase 7y ago
        But you first have to figure out who to put in jail for contempt and in order to ban it you'll have to take down the entire block chain. I'm not totally sure how this one works but with ENS there are key holders that theoretically have the ability to do operations on any entry but it takes a certain number of them to all coordinate and agree.
        mugsie 7y ago
        Right, so you threaten all of them with jail until they hand over the keys to a US Court to continue to do the takedowns for copyright enforcement / ISIS website / scam site pretending to be Amazon / the new Silk Road / $reason. We have seen this before, where people who run these services are personally held in contempt until they comply with the order.
deweller 7y ago
If this gains traction, you will be able to pay a service provider a fee to update DNS entries for you. This is like the current system used by registrars. You don't need to care if it is powered by a blockchain in the background if you don't want to. I think it is great to have an alternative DNS system that is more censorship resistant.
- mugsie 7y ago
  > you will be able to pay a service provider a fee to update DNS entries for you. So every time I add a new LB, or cycle out an environment I have to pay someone? And then wait for them to process the chain to publish the result? Remind me, what did etherium get to for transactons to clear? 20 something hours? That is not something I want when I am trying to redirect traffic from either a set of NS records that are broken, or if I host the full zone in the chain, a broken AWS / Azure region. Combine the time to wait for caches to refresh on the internets (better these days, but still longer than people would like), with waiting for a blockchain to publish my new records, and you have ops people in pain. DNS is already one of the largest fault tolerant, eventually consistent, cachable, federated, and globally distributed key value databases ever to exist - we don't need to add blockchain to the mix.
  - tynes 7y ago
    Handshake is for top level domains. You can do quick updates using traditional DNS infrastructure at a domain underneath a Handshake top level domain. The benefit is that you have a cryptographic asset representing the top level domain, the root of trust comes from you, value can accrue in the asset itself, its tradable with non interactive atomic swaps and is censorship resistant.
pinhead26 7y ago
Well you don't need to mine the coin to use the DNS system. You can obtain tokens some other way (an exchange) and buy a name on chain.
StavrosK 7y ago
Isn't this middlebrow dismissal? Like, I get that you don't want to have to "mine a token" if "mining a token" means "waiting half an hour", but if it means "waiting 100ms or paying $0.00001", I'd take that tradeoff to own my DNS.
- mugsie 7y ago
  I wouldn't - it means that I am reliant on a blockchain transaction clearing, and as the chain gets bigger, that time has potential to increase. etherium was really quick and cheap when it launched, and it is not now ...
  - LyndsySimon 7y ago
    > as the chain gets bigger, that time has potential to increase I don't see how this follows at all. The slowing transaction incorporation times for major cryptocurrencies is related to transaction volume, not to the total size of the chain to date. Presumably a system restricted to updated HNS entries would not encounter anywhere near the same transaction volume.
stcredzero 7y ago
I get the "global, transparent, append only log" appeal, but for the reality of most people, I don't want to rely on a blockchain converging, or processing my update in a certain amount of time. From what I've heard, the "Layer 2" networks for even the most venerable of blockchains have the potential to reduce transaction times a couple of orders of magnitude.
justinmchase 7y ago
You don't do the mining, you pay a small fee to have others do the mining. By small I mean it costs me about $0.004 USD worth of eth to update my ENS domains. A pretty small price to pay for the superior features. For private info perhaps DNS will continue to work just fine for companies. Theoretically you can also host private block-chains and use that if you really wanted to.
- mugsie 7y ago
  > A pretty small price to pay for the superior features. I am still trying to figure out what superior features these are, even for me as a small sites. For certs, I can have Lets Encrypt, and set a CAA record of letsencypt.org. For DNS, I can host my own, or use one of the myriad of providers out there. I am not likely to have my domain taken away from me (and neither are most people), so the DNS ROOT switch is not a draw. Why would I move to a DNS ROOT with no one on it?

by mugsie 7y ago

rasengan 7y ago

You don’t need to store the zone on chain - you can actually simply include NS records and have your authoritative server elsewhere - just like DNS today!

mugsie 7y ago
then I don't see the point, other than a set of tlds that half the people in the world won't be able to access ...
- rasengan 7y ago
  The DNS ROOT becomes controlled by the people instead of ICANN - it’s the end of ceased and censored domains. Additionally, HNS also fixes the problems the CA system has today. CAs can generate certificates for any domain - even if the domain owner didn’t request it. This has led to countless occurrences of abuse.
  - mugsie 7y ago
    > The DNS ROOT becomes controlled by the people instead of ICANN - it’s the end of ceased and censored domains. Good luck with that. If there is no way to have a US court take ownership of a domain (or force someone to handover a bad faith registration), someone will either end up in jail for contempt, or it will just be banned. > Additionally, HNS also fixes the problems the CA system has today. CAs can generate certificates for any domain - even if the domain owner didn’t request it. This has led to countless occurrences of abuse. It fixes the non EV cert situation (kind of - CAA records also help this, and work on the standard internet), but doesn't fix EV certs (i.e. amzon.tld is actually Amazon LLC and not Scammers R Us Ltd.) It also ignores the reality of most major companies in the world MITM'ing all outbound traffic from offices to ensure sensitive content is not exfilled from the company - there is 0 chance of them allowing traffic out that they could not MITM.
    - crediblewitness 7y ago
      > Good luck with that. If there is no way to have a US court take ownership of a domain (or force someone to handover a bad faith registration), someone will either end up in jail for contempt, or it will just be banned. This same argument applies to bitcoin and it has not (yet) been banned in much of the free world.
      - mugsie 7y ago
        We don't see them trying to change anything on the chain with bitcoin - just trace people (and law enforcement has gotten pretty good at that to be fair). They seize wallets from people they arrest, like normal cash / assets, or get a court order to get companies holding the coin to hand them over, if the accused used a hosted wallet.
        crediblewitness 7y ago
        it would work exactly the same then: taking ownership of the handshake private key by which the registration means you control that name.
    - justinmchase 7y ago
      But you first have to figure out who to put in jail for contempt and in order to ban it you'll have to take down the entire block chain. I'm not totally sure how this one works but with ENS there are key holders that theoretically have the ability to do operations on any entry but it takes a certain number of them to all coordinate and agree.
      - mugsie 7y ago
        Right, so you threaten all of them with jail until they hand over the keys to a US Court to continue to do the takedowns for copyright enforcement / ISIS website / scam site pretending to be Amazon / the new Silk Road / $reason. We have seen this before, where people who run these services are personally held in contempt until they comply with the order.

deweller 7y ago

If this gains traction, you will be able to pay a service provider a fee to update DNS entries for you. This is like the current system used by registrars. You don't need to care if it is powered by a blockchain in the background if you don't want to. I think it is great to have an alternative DNS system that is more censorship resistant.

mugsie 7y ago
> you will be able to pay a service provider a fee to update DNS entries for you. So every time I add a new LB, or cycle out an environment I have to pay someone? And then wait for them to process the chain to publish the result? Remind me, what did etherium get to for transactons to clear? 20 something hours? That is not something I want when I am trying to redirect traffic from either a set of NS records that are broken, or if I host the full zone in the chain, a broken AWS / Azure region. Combine the time to wait for caches to refresh on the internets (better these days, but still longer than people would like), with waiting for a blockchain to publish my new records, and you have ops people in pain. DNS is already one of the largest fault tolerant, eventually consistent, cachable, federated, and globally distributed key value databases ever to exist - we don't need to add blockchain to the mix.
- tynes 7y ago
  Handshake is for top level domains. You can do quick updates using traditional DNS infrastructure at a domain underneath a Handshake top level domain. The benefit is that you have a cryptographic asset representing the top level domain, the root of trust comes from you, value can accrue in the asset itself, its tradable with non interactive atomic swaps and is censorship resistant.

pinhead26 7y ago

Well you don't need to mine the coin to use the DNS system. You can obtain tokens some other way (an exchange) and buy a name on chain.

StavrosK 7y ago

Isn't this middlebrow dismissal? Like, I get that you don't want to have to "mine a token" if "mining a token" means "waiting half an hour", but if it means "waiting 100ms or paying $0.00001", I'd take that tradeoff to own my DNS.

mugsie 7y ago
I wouldn't - it means that I am reliant on a blockchain transaction clearing, and as the chain gets bigger, that time has potential to increase. etherium was really quick and cheap when it launched, and it is not now ...
- LyndsySimon 7y ago
  > as the chain gets bigger, that time has potential to increase I don't see how this follows at all. The slowing transaction incorporation times for major cryptocurrencies is related to transaction volume, not to the total size of the chain to date. Presumably a system restricted to updated HNS entries would not encounter anywhere near the same transaction volume.

stcredzero 7y ago

I get the "global, transparent, append only log" appeal, but for the reality of most people, I don't want to rely on a blockchain converging, or processing my update in a certain amount of time. From what I've heard, the "Layer 2" networks for even the most venerable of blockchains have the potential to reduce transaction times a couple of orders of magnitude.

justinmchase 7y ago

You don't do the mining, you pay a small fee to have others do the mining. By small I mean it costs me about $0.004 USD worth of eth to update my ENS domains. A pretty small price to pay for the superior features. For private info perhaps DNS will continue to work just fine for companies. Theoretically you can also host private block-chains and use that if you really wanted to.

mugsie 7y ago
> A pretty small price to pay for the superior features. I am still trying to figure out what superior features these are, even for me as a small sites. For certs, I can have Lets Encrypt, and set a CAA record of letsencypt.org. For DNS, I can host my own, or use one of the myriad of providers out there. I am not likely to have my domain taken away from me (and neither are most people), so the DNS ROOT switch is not a draw. Why would I move to a DNS ROOT with no one on it?