4 ms·

This is a complex question. In order to use GNS "like" DNS, you need a similar Root Zone governance. See also https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns

This is a complex question. In order to use GNS "like" DNS, you need a similar Root Zone governance. See also https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns-19.html#name-start-zones https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns-19.html#n... and https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns-19.html#name-start-zone-configuration https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns-19.html#n... However, the protocol does not really care what kind of governance is chosen or present. In order to understand this a bit better I invite anyone to read section 1-3 of https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns-19.html https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns-19.html

zerocrates 4y ago
I mean, DNS also doesn't care at a protocol level about governance, right? It's just the actual, practical DNS system that everybody actually uses which does.
- schanzen 4y ago
  Yes. And it is totally possible that a "common" and default use case with GNS looks just like DNS. The spec just does not mandate the governance. In fact, it mandates implementations to honor user-chosen configurations for petname overrides. (See my other comments)