9 ms·
The public won’t be able to use the internet without it.
by sroussey 5y ago
The public won’t be able to use the internet without it.
- Y_Y 5y agoThis is an interesting proposal. After some thought I must say I'm also in favour of it.
- wizzwizz4 5y agoThe public would still use internet applications, like Facebook. They just wouldn't be able to use the web any more.
- mitigating 5y agoApps use hostsnames 99% of the time.
- toast0 5y agoI don't think Facebook's apps work when there's no access to DNS. At least it didn't seem like it when I was working to keep that capability for WhatsApp as it moved into FB datacenters. I don't think very many other applications will work without DNS either, although I never did much competitive testing.
- xrisk 5y agoTelegram does AFAIK.
- wizzwizz4 5y agoFacebook could (relatively) easily modify their system to do its own IP handling; they probably have enough money to rebuild the entire stack.
- toast0 5y agoSure, they could, but at least while I was there, there was no interest in doing it, and amazement than anyone else would want to (and push back on declaring at least a handful of IPs as stably allocated enough to be included in app downloads).
- chx 5y agoWhen was the last time you read a URL aloud or typed it in?
- arthurcolle 5y agoa minute ago? what an outrageous question
- fiddlerwoaroof 5y agoI think many people Google “gmail” and click the link instead of memorizing URLs
- Firehawke 5y agoEven then you're going to be hitting up DNS to turn "www.gmail.com" into an IP address.
- edoceo 5y agoThen an HTTP redirect to mail.google.com
- teitoklien 5y agoAnd maybe to accounts.google.com too , if you’re not signed in
- oneplane 5y agoThe last 100 times were in the past few hours, roughly. Are you assuming nobody uses FQDNs or URLs anymore? Better yet, are you assuming only humans use those?
- freshpots 5y agoYou were both savage and self-deprecating, well done!