3 ms·

isn't dns already decentralised? (apart form everyone basically using the same server(s) / google ?) you can just set up your own dns if you want to have your o

isn't dns already decentralised? (apart form everyone basically using the same server(s) / google ?) you can just set up your own dns if you want to have your own mappings of ip->dn and vice versa. just set your dns to the server you prefer?

topranks 7y ago
The root DNS servers are distributed widely and operated by different organizations. But it’s a single root, and it is administered by ICANN directly who decide who can be a root name operator. So there is central control there.
- vectorEQ 7y ago
  this does not stop one from having their own dns server and resolving what they like. the protocol itself has no owner, just a specified way of functioning. one can choose what dns server to use, and how to configure that to respond. building some sort of overlay network on top of the internet has been done before (.onion anyone?). How would this improve upon such a scheme for example? I really don't think it adds anything but the word 'blockchain' to the equation, and i honestly don't think that adds anything in the way of security. additionally, to revoke ones domain name to say, resolve to another host, changing hosting provider for example, would seem impossible in an immutable blockchain. Would that result in forks or in namespace pollution?
sybercecurity 7y ago
A non-profit (ICANN) is the administrator of the DNS root zone. ICANN's model uses a multi-stakeholder model, so registrars, ccTLD holders (i.e. governments) all can contribute, but ICANN claims their board has ultimate decision. The actual zonefile is hosted by a group of volunteer organizations. The variety, and the use of anycast means that the root zone is fairly stable and as reliable as any other distributed system (i.e. cloud). You can even download the root zone and run it locally if you want. Handshake is interesting, but it conflates DNS and the CA ecosystem. They are different and used for different things. Most of the big issues around DNS isn't about the protocol, but the policies and legal issues around domain names and their ownership.

topranks 7y ago

The root DNS servers are distributed widely and operated by different organizations. But it’s a single root, and it is administered by ICANN directly who decide who can be a root name operator. So there is central control there.

vectorEQ 7y ago
this does not stop one from having their own dns server and resolving what they like. the protocol itself has no owner, just a specified way of functioning. one can choose what dns server to use, and how to configure that to respond. building some sort of overlay network on top of the internet has been done before (.onion anyone?). How would this improve upon such a scheme for example? I really don't think it adds anything but the word 'blockchain' to the equation, and i honestly don't think that adds anything in the way of security. additionally, to revoke ones domain name to say, resolve to another host, changing hosting provider for example, would seem impossible in an immutable blockchain. Would that result in forks or in namespace pollution?

sybercecurity 7y ago

A non-profit (ICANN) is the administrator of the DNS root zone. ICANN's model uses a multi-stakeholder model, so registrars, ccTLD holders (i.e. governments) all can contribute, but ICANN claims their board has ultimate decision. The actual zonefile is hosted by a group of volunteer organizations. The variety, and the use of anycast means that the root zone is fairly stable and as reliable as any other distributed system (i.e. cloud). You can even download the root zone and run it locally if you want. Handshake is interesting, but it conflates DNS and the CA ecosystem. They are different and used for different things. Most of the big issues around DNS isn't about the protocol, but the policies and legal issues around domain names and their ownership.