Slashdot Mirror

To start with: I do not think the phonenumbers are here for a long time.

"phone numbers" are how the switching -- and billing -- are done for landlines, cell phones, and for many data services like DSL.

It is how it works NOW.
First the easy one. DSL does not need a phone number. It does not need a phone line. The sole reason is that phone companies want to get the extra money. It could be any line.

With services like VoIP, many people would also technically not need a phone number. I can easily think of a system that does work without phonenumbers.

So what will prevent it? Because whatever replaces it, it will still be a phonenumber by another name. Be it a userID, an IPv6 adress or something completely different. It will be a n identifier.

We already have that. It is a phonenumber. Just like in hindsight there are better ways to deal with DNS from the beginning (e.g. only country codes. Start at the beginning, so you get http://us/org/slashdot/tech//c...) we can easily think of a better system that is the phonenumber.

IPv6 could be a valid candidate if you start there. Other systems could be thought of as well. But we have the phone numbers now. They are worldwide. That means in each and every country and each and every village., house and on every person on earth.
The alternatives are not that much better; so no reason to change.

And while I am at it, the order of the domain should have been reversed. So instead of e.g. tech.slashdot.org.us, It would have been better to go for us.org.slashdot.tech as you then follow the tree. Even neater if there would have been no dots, but slashes instead:
http://us/org/slashdot/tech//d... (Please note the second double slashes to show where the domain ends and the file system begins.

Actually in the 80s that is pretty much how it was.

UUCP mail was routed from one mail server to another to another before finally (hopefully!) landing in a users mail spool on a server they frequently checked more than others. This one done with whats called "bang paths" as they used ! as the separator, and the route was listed left to right ending with a double colon and the username.

Even at the time DNS replaced hosts.txt on the ARPAnet, there were still other connected networks like BITnet and CSnet using different protocols that used mixed forms of routing paths, and neither network required NSF approval to join like the ARPAnet did.
BITnet was IBMs VMS network, and anyone that had a VAX with the RSCS software installed and could afford a leased line was able to get on the network and get data to/from the arpanet.
There was a serious perceived threat from these other protocols, most of which lacked a unified or centrally managed naming lookup scheme (although that is exactly what RSCS was, although only for VAX)

At the time each protocol pretty much only looked out for their own, except for DNS which was advertized as "generic" and "non-proprietary" as only IP was required. DNS was also an open standard like IP and TCP. That was enough for DNS to "win" and become the one true naming system.

I'm not sure why they decided to use a right to left hierarchy beyond just trying to differentiate themselves from existing protocols...
But it doesn't follow the URL/URI standard because that wasn't to be invented for another 10 years or so.
As you say, hindsight is always 20/20

There's only a couple of organizational schemes that make sense; Geographical, topical, and organizational. Of those, the third was the first used: Separating domains on the basis of their function; educational, commercial, non-commercial, and governmental.

On hindsight, that was not the wisest decision. It would have been better to ONLY use the geographical system. That would have meant no com, net and org.

What about things like linux.org, you might ask? Well, when I look at the whois page, I see an american address. So it would have been linux.us or if the country would have wanted: linux.org.us

Thise who want availability in more then one country can go to each country, just like they do now. Each country would be able to decide what they do with their domain, just like they do now. e.g.:Do they accept people from other countries or not?

It is hindsight, so nothing we can do about it now.

If they ever decide to start all over from 0, it would be nice that they start with the toplevel and not end with it. That would mean you would not have http://www.example.com/directory/file.html, but rather something like http://us/example/www/directory/file.txt (and even allow http:\\us\example\www\directory\file.html
Sure, it might look strange as we are not used to it, but it is more logical.

So the only reason that you are against it is so you do not need to pay more for another domain name. And yet by registering three daomain names (com, net, org) you and almost everybody else are using up those names.

I always thought these com, net, org and all others are not a good idea. The best would have been to just use the ones for each country. That would have made this site slashdot.us. "But what about international organizations like debian?" I hear you ask. Well, either take the one where the organisation is registerd, the founder is located, the cheapest one or one for each country if you want.. And While I am ranting about stuff that wil never change, it would have been better to have it named in revers e.g. us.slashdot Or even http://us/slashdot

Oh well.

They should never have gone with the generic domain names. nstead just the country names. That would ahve been *.us for the USA. "What about debian.org" you might ask or shlashdot.org? They would have been debian.org.us.
"But that is not international!" you might moan. Well, neither is .com, .net or .org. Basically they are US domains. So instead of a .com, people or companies would have a .com.us name.

Even names like nato.int should be registerd in each country that wants it.

It would then be up to each country (just as it is now) if they would accept registration from other countries or not and what other restrictions (or not) they would want. That way each country can device their subdomain to whatever they desire.

Obviously this will never happen now, so it is only an afterthought.

Also as an afterthought reversing the order would be much more logic, so instead of having example.com.us you would have us.com.example or even /us/com/example. That way the comments page for /. would be http://us/com/slashdot/tech/comments.pl

With the current DNS system that won't work for obvious reasons, but it would have been nice. Again just as an afterthought. I am sure that many people will see issues as they will compare it with what we have now. However if we would have started with the above, we would have found solutions to any issue.

"Maybe, but right now the US is asserting control over everyone else's networks."

No, they are providing an indexing service whereby a host's IP address can be obtained from a very large hierarchical look-up table.

The only thing that makes this particular index "the" index, is that everyone has agreed to use it. If anyone doesn't want to use it, they are free to make an alternate one. Alternates exist, but no one uses them, because the current system is good enough.

Personally, I wouldn't mind it if DNS was restructured to look something like this:

http://us/org/slashdot/
http://uk/co/amazon/
http://com/ebay/
etc.

There's no reason that someone accessing web content should care which part of a URL is the host and which part is the directory, and it would blur the artificial status barrier that exists between hosting a domain, a subdomain, and a directory within a domain.

I don't see why the whole ".xxx" thing is such a big deal. Why don't we all just agree that the following are flagged as porn:

xxx.domain.com
domain.com/xxx

If you go with slashes instead of dots then the path could drill down to individual directories..

(p.s. please ignore that slashdot finds links for these
examples)

http://co/tld ... (for the nationalistic )
http://tld/co ... (for the NewWorldOrderOneWorldGovmnt) ... /entity/subenitty/directory/subdirectory/file

for example, calcula might be found at:
http://us/org/pentamino/home/pentalive/calcula/ind ex.html

(and as it is currently "/index.html" is the default and might be omitted)

[note: I did not create links to obvious sites like slashdot.org, kde.org, redhat.com, etc]

http://www.seul.org/edu/acpe2002.html

It's been a week since Eric and I went up to the ACPE (Association for Computer Professionals in Education) conference. We spoke with tech coordinators from 25 large Oregon and Washington school districts being audited by Microsoft for software licensing compliance. It's time for an update and some reflection.

All of the districts received a letter from Microsoft demanding a software audit. Steve Duin, a Portland columnist wrote about it in his column.

Before Steve's column schools were calling MS and asking for extensions. They reported that MS was less than friendly and responsive. After the column several things happened.

The Portland Public School switchboard was jammed for two days with calls from Linux users volunteering to come to PDX from all over the west coast to help with software migration.

MS was hit with many angry calls from all over the place. I can only imagine the content of those conversations. Having Duin's column posted on Slashdot.org certainly helped get the word out about what MS was doing.

The Slashdot post came out on Monday. Later that week most of the technology folks from OR and WA were heading to a conference on Thursday and Friday. MS agreed to come and present a special session on the audit and MS licensing on Thursday afternoon. Many of the impacted schools met the night before. There was much solidarity and a realization that if they all stuck together they would have more clout when dealing with MS. There was also a common understanding that this audit would cost districts money and time. Two things in short supply these days. Portland Public schools will devote two FTE to the audit. That's over $100k of money that could go to classrooms and teachers. Needless to say the relationship between these schools and Microsoft had been changed in a fundamental way. No one was talking about using software without paying for it. It's just that when they came face to face with the power an EULA gives MS, they saw things in a different light. MS software in schools was seen as a logistical and financial liability when compared with GPL licensed alternatives.

Now we get to alternatives. There was actually discussion of mass migrations to Linux. The interesting thing is that with current desktops and K12LTSP, it really is an option now. If MS was not willing to flex on demands, several of districts were ready to dump MS software.

On Thursday MS came in with a team to do some damage control. I've never seen anyone more worried or concerned. Quoting, "We never had any idea that there would be a reaction like this. Our two words for today are friendly and flexible." And they were... They said a lot about understanding the hardships schools face and how we were hurting for funding. They let us know that the audits were meant to be helpful and that this was not a BSA audit (yet...). They said that they would meet with schools one on one to extend deadlines and be flexible. I have to admit that they were just as they promised to be, friendly and flexible. They did a great job of disarming the most worried school folks and then hosted an open bar for the rest of the afternoon.

I underestimated the ability of MS to react so well and do such a good job. The most effective motivation for change is pain. MS did everything they could that day to make sure we would not feel any pain. ;-^)

Friday morning Eric and I did a session on using GPL software in schools. Eric did a good job on covering what's going on with the server end of things and I did a demonstration with our Linux Toaster. We like to stress that in many ways, software is now generic. You don't need to license or even worry about what kind of toaster oven you have at home. The same thing should be true of your word processor and email client.

I was still disturbed about the MS show we saw on Thursday until we started hearing more and more questions about migration. It seems like schools were taking the extra time given them by MS and using it to good advantage. We spent ALL of the Q&A time on migration paths to free software. Eric comes from the business world. I'm an educator. He pointed out to me that the WORST thing that could have come from all of this was a forced, overnight migration to Linux. Having time to do it right is much better. We've been talking with folks now for a couple of weeks and there is a lot happening.

I can't share everything that is in the works right now but there are two areas where we need to focus our efforts for schools in terms of migration:

Support and training... They need someone to call for help and they all need training. This is the #1 issue keeping schools from using free software. They just don't know how to do it and keep it running in a production environment. Anything we do to promote training will result in an increased use of Linux in schools. The good news in this area is that we've moved beyond the awareness level in many schools. The bottom line is that schools see others using Linux and saving money while providing superior service to classrooms. They want to go in that direction but they just don't know how.
End user, ease of use issues... The #2 fear facing schools is the thought that teachers will not be able to use the software. No one is worried about the kids. Eric is now working on a classroom kiosk version of K12Linux. We're hoping to produce a simplistic desktop with few options and just a few icons for basic applications. There are a bunch of desktop improvements that are part of RH 7.3. The Linux desktop is really coming along. Teachers however equate choices with complexity and that is something to fear. We think a classroom kiosk using KDE is something that might be useful in these instances.
More good news... I'm starting to hear from more major vendors who have been getting requests for Linux in school solutions. We're getting quotes from Micron, Dell and IBM for the 65 K12LTSP workstations we're about to purchase for a new high school. Before we had to build everything ourselves.

More to do... Our greatest resource is our local user group. We need to help schools and LUGs around the country make connections. Towards this end we're going to start promoting a July 4th. software freedom day. Sponsored by LUGs all over America, this event will bring together Unix/Linux experts and schools to establish local support connections for training and migration to GPL software.

I'll send out more on the software freedom day later. I hope you'll help get your LUGs and schools together.

Paul Nelson
Riverdale School

I also was at this conference and saw/heard the same things and interpreted them the same. My take on the outcome after the Microsoft panel is also the same. Microsoft finally realize that there were lines even they could not step over with retaliation.

A couple of good things should come from this.

First, Microsoft got its hands slapped by its very bread and butter. They were informed that they had stepped too far and society was not going to stand for it. Bear in mind, like Paul said, no one was in favor of pirating or using illegal software. But in an open environment as Schools, who can really regulate everything? In our district we have God control over our machines and dictate all hardware and network decisions, but even then have had to give some leeway on software installs for political issues. If Microsoft works with not against its clientele, there may actually be progress towards decreasing piracy.

Second, awareness is out about the ramifications of illegal software and its impact on schools. This should push Administrators towards policies forcing legal software use. Of course legal software costs money, unless its Open Source :-)

Third, much talk was made about alternatives. This talk will continue and spread as more districts/schools attempt to be more legal and avoid future confrontations with Microsoft. As more adopt Open Source and alternative software, more commercial companies will get involved and provide alternatives to Microsoft platforms.

This may be the final straw that pushed to evaluate their stance, to think that Microsoft may have just slit their throat, and in their own backyard. Of course it was humourus watching the Microsoft reps. kissing up by keeping the hosted bar open for hours after its scheduled shutdown. As if we will forget that quick....

Kevin Stiles
Technology Department
Paso School District