Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Choosing an Alternate Root Server?

Posted by Cliff on from the desperately-in-need-of-choices dept.

issachar asks: "While it seems that almost everyone at Slashdot believes that the ICANN / Verisign monopoly on TLD's is a bad thing, there doesn't seem to be a lot of agreement on which is the best alternate root server. While it might be impossible to give a simple answer to this question, perhaps some sort of unity would be a good thing. The recent story on Name.Space, doesn't do anything to clear up the confusion for people who are trying to pick an alternate root server. Furthermore, it seems that co-operation isn't working very well as OpenNIC doesn't recognise the ORSC yet. The frequent suggestion to get one of the major ISP's such as AOL on board won't fly until we have a leader (or at least a group of leading root servers that agree on basic principles). Any thoughts?"

5 of 18 comments (clear)

  1. There is no alternative by biot · · Score: 3

    Asking for the "best alternate root server" is like asking for the "best car crash" to be in. There is no alternative.

    Read RFC 2826.

    1. Re:There is no alternative by Inti · · Score: 3
      Mind being a bit more verbose? What is it exactly that makes the ICANN/Verisign root preferable to some of the alternatives? I think your statement is non-obvious to a lot of people here.

      Yes, in the past there has been a lot of "tempest in a teapot" kinds of squabbles in the alt DNS scene. The scene is maturing rapidly, though. We are approaching the point of having a unified alternate root, a sort of federal namespace. We are still in the beta stage, metaphorically, but it won't be long before we're ready for a 1.0 release.


      Claim your namespace.

  2. Root Servers by Bryan+Andersen · · Score: 3

    My personal opinion is you wish to sell host names then you must provide atleast one root name server for all to use for each TLD you sell names under, and if you have multiple name servers you must have them geographically dispersed. Your root name servers will provide lookups for all the TLDs. If you can't provide that, then you don't get to sell domain names. You want to start a new TLD, then provide the root name server. This would show a certin level of commitment.

    To do this all the root name servers would need to agree on a means for updating domain name service information in real time, but that should be possible.

    Yes, I know a root name server is a beast to operate, but then you are providing a service that can't suffer outtages.

    1. Re:Root Servers by Inti · · Score: 3
      Interesting you should point this out, because that is exactly the policy we have over at the OpenNIC. Each TLD (we only have four now) has a root nameserver, which is synched with a central master server. These are dispersed (at present we have servers in the Bay Area, LA, New York and New Jersey).

      See http://www.opennic.glue/public_servers.html

      or

      http://www.opennic.unrated.net/public_servers.html if you're not using opennic nameservers.

      Of course, we don't sell domain names. They're free.


      Claim your namespace.

  3. OpenNIC! by Inti · · Score: 3
    For me it would have to be OpenNIC. TINC is fine, but I think the basic idea of a democratically governed namespace is important enough to decide the issue. At least for me.

    As far as the issue of cooperation between the roots, that is something we are working on quite a bit now. In the last few months OpenNIC has begun peering TLDs from both AlterNIC and the Pacific Root (including quite a few that are also in the ORSC root, such as .biz). We are currently trying to work out agreements with TINC (answer your email, guys!), ORSC and name.space. The only group which seems to be resolutely set against cooperation is new.net. If you have no other reason not to use them, that should be enough.

    OpenNIC also provides full resolution of the ICANN/Verisign and country code TLDs, and all of the other legacy TLDs.

    The main obstacle to cooperation is the existence of multiple claims to a few popular TLD strings.Both ORSC and AlterNIC, for example, claim .nic. And .xxx. And some others with obvious symbolic and/or commercial significance. We are trying to work these issues out. We are making progress, I think, in spite of some of the egos involved.

    I urge everyone who is sick of ICANN to start using one of the alternate roots. I recommend OpenNIC, but that should soon become irrelevant with the establishment of a more or less unified alternate namespace.

    I would also urge people who believe in this to register domain names in alternate namespace and to make content available under those domains. After all, the only way we'll ever get any kind of widespread adoption is by having content that is sufficiently compelling to make people complain to their ISPs about not being able to see it.


    Claim your namespace.