4 ms·

I'd settle for global and not human readable, if it means I get a domain I can use as a CNAME on a nicer domain. Dynamic dns services are nice and all, but nee

I'd settle for global and not human readable, if it means I get a domain I can use as a CNAME on a nicer domain. Dynamic dns services are nice and all, but needing to pre-register gets kind of annoying.

nine_k 3y ago
It can't possibly work, if you want your nicer domain to be globally unique. If you don't, it depends on how local your domain needs to be; maybe all you need is a record in /etc/hosts on your home router.
- extraduder_ire 3y ago
  Would <UUID>.example.com not work? With first to register getting priority. Or <pubkey>.example.com with the corresponding private key needed to do updates. The "nicer" domain I am referring to would be a normal domain from a registrar.
- pavon 3y ago
  If I understand they want a (globally unique, secure) GNS name and a (globally unique, human friendly) traditional DNS name which acts as an alias for the GNS name via CNAME. This can work, and sounds like a good compromise in that it lets machines and people who care deeply about security use your secure name (which is more portable than an IP address), while providing a human friendly name for people who don't care and just want things to work.
  - schanzen 3y ago
    These are all valid deployment questions, which we tried to address in Appendix A. In a nutshell, we expect that resolvers would ship with a (large) set of default "suffix-to-zone" mappings, that can be overridden by the user to provide a usable and convenient out-of-the box experience. Not that "we expect" means that this would be the ideal scenario, not something to expect when installing our reference implementation right now.
  - nine_k 3y ago
    But what's the point? Federation, I suppose? Because if globally unique, human-readable DNS still works, I see no point in migrating off it. If the point is smoother migration, then we should start forgetting about human-readability, because it's going to disappear anyway.
    - Karrot_Kream 3y ago
      TLS certs without having to buy a domain? Create a GNS domain, set a LEHO record with the necessary Host name, and make your cert based on that? Obviously you'll need a CA that's willing to issue certs for GNS LEHO names, but that way you can use the current TLS CA system to a domain without having to actually spend money on one. Alternatively, have the CA issue wildcard certs for zTLDs and then you can manage your own zTLD without issue.
      - nine_k 3y ago
        Letsencrypt allows to produce TLS certificates for free, under a reasonable, globally trusted CA. If we wanted to go away from centralization here, that would require a serious breakthrough, the magnitude of Bitcoin.
        Karrot_Kream 3y ago
        Sure but that's contingent on owning or being able to host something under a domain.

nine_k 3y ago

It can't possibly work, if you want your nicer domain to be globally unique. If you don't, it depends on how local your domain needs to be; maybe all you need is a record in /etc/hosts on your home router.

extraduder_ire 3y ago
Would <UUID>.example.com not work? With first to register getting priority. Or <pubkey>.example.com with the corresponding private key needed to do updates. The "nicer" domain I am referring to would be a normal domain from a registrar.
pavon 3y ago
If I understand they want a (globally unique, secure) GNS name and a (globally unique, human friendly) traditional DNS name which acts as an alias for the GNS name via CNAME. This can work, and sounds like a good compromise in that it lets machines and people who care deeply about security use your secure name (which is more portable than an IP address), while providing a human friendly name for people who don't care and just want things to work.
- schanzen 3y ago
  These are all valid deployment questions, which we tried to address in Appendix A. In a nutshell, we expect that resolvers would ship with a (large) set of default "suffix-to-zone" mappings, that can be overridden by the user to provide a usable and convenient out-of-the box experience. Not that "we expect" means that this would be the ideal scenario, not something to expect when installing our reference implementation right now.
- nine_k 3y ago
  But what's the point? Federation, I suppose? Because if globally unique, human-readable DNS still works, I see no point in migrating off it. If the point is smoother migration, then we should start forgetting about human-readability, because it's going to disappear anyway.
  - Karrot_Kream 3y ago
    TLS certs without having to buy a domain? Create a GNS domain, set a LEHO record with the necessary Host name, and make your cert based on that? Obviously you'll need a CA that's willing to issue certs for GNS LEHO names, but that way you can use the current TLS CA system to a domain without having to actually spend money on one. Alternatively, have the CA issue wildcard certs for zTLDs and then you can manage your own zTLD without issue.
    - nine_k 3y ago
      Letsencrypt allows to produce TLS certificates for free, under a reasonable, globally trusted CA. If we wanted to go away from centralization here, that would require a serious breakthrough, the magnitude of Bitcoin.
      - Karrot_Kream 3y ago
        Sure but that's contingent on owning or being able to host something under a domain.