3 ms·
> DNS is a vital piece of infrastructure It is, and therefore it should be 100% decentralized, if only to keep it out of the grabby hands of governments, EU or
by ur-whale 6y ago
> DNS is a vital piece of infrastructure
It is, and therefore it should be 100% decentralized, if only to keep it out of the grabby hands of governments, EU or otherwise.
- madeofpalk 6y agoIs the 12 root server organisations an example of decentralisation?
- EricE 6y agoYup. As well as the decentralization and diversity of the technical operations of each pool. Operational diversity can be as important or even more important than technical diversity since humans tend to be the weakest links in technical chains :p
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ur-whale 6y ago> Is the 12 root server organisations an example of decentralisation? It isn't. Proof: the fact that US random three letter agencies can take down websites.
- _-david-_ 6y agoIt is impossible to build any website that cannot be taken down. The government could seize the physical servers if they wanted to. By your definition that means nothing is decentralized.
- booleandilemma 6y agoThis sounds like a problem to solve.
- _-david-_ 6y agoHow? Even if you were to host a website on a satellite the government could launch a rocket and blow it up. If the website is hosted on Earth they could physically cut cables if they wanted to. There is no way to fully prevent the government from preventing access to a website. The internet is decentralized, but not fully immune from governments.
- jrockway 6y agoI mean, you can have more than one copy of the website. Maybe a government can send one satellite-destroying missile, but probably not thousands of them. Think about how many people have the Linux kernel Git repo cloned on their workstation. It would be essentially impossible for any government to destroy all copies.
- Sargos 6y ago>It is impossible to build any website that cannot be taken down This is becoming less true each day, especially with the advent of IPFS and Ethereum. Uniswap's website will never go down. uniswap.org might be seized but uniswap.eth cannot be altered by anyone. In a few decades it will be normal for websites to be decentralized and permanent. It's actually quite needed for the robustness of critical internet architecture.
- Denvercoder9 6y agoTaking down websites has nothing at all to do with the root servers. The root servers only distribute information about which nameserver is responsible for which TLD, and doesn't concern individual websites at all.
- theshrike79 6y agoHear me out: BLOCKCHAIN DNS! /s
- watt 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin all you want
- twobitshifter 6y agoAaron Swartz (edit) had the same idea http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/squarezooko http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/squarezooko
- BugsJustFindMe 6y agoThere's no ch in Swartz
- Sargos 6y agoThis ended with /s but DNS and other global namespace management systems are actually one of the problems blockchains solve perfectly. We all need to know what the value of some key->value pair is and have that information always available and easy to update. Blockchains handle data distribution natively, allow updates from authorized parties, and have 100% uptime. Transitioning DNS to something like ENS is something with lots of upsides and few downsides. Take a look at https://ens.domains/about https://ens.domains/about and https://handshake.org/ https://handshake.org/
- jonhearty 6y agoHandshake.org provides an alternate root zone that seems pretty relevant here
- salawat 6y agoNo it isn't. It's a crutch, but also one of the most centralized, manipulable levers for controlling what is and isn't discoverable on the Net. Think about it. Domain names are seizable. IP's aren't. You can't stop someone with an IP from existing. Whenever someone talks about regulating DNS, it should translate to "We want to take control of Namespace management.