But no.. that's not quite how it works. InterNIC handles several of the TLD's (the common ones,.com,.org,.net,.edu, I dunno about.gov and.mil and.int, I think those are elsewhere). There is an agreed-upon convention as to who handles the different TLD's, meaning the country codes. InterNIC has no say in how.ca is run or how.us is run, that is up to the appropriate governing body. The IAB decides what the TLD structure is, don't they? InterNIC is just the registry for *some* of them. It is not up to NSI to decide to add new TLD's or anything like that.. they are just supposed to manage the ones they have. The world is by no means bound to stick to those.
Really. I've dealt with them MANY times, over MANY years.
I'm not saying nobody can do it better, I'm not even saying they are doing an adequate job. I AM saying that SOMEONE has to do it. If not them, WHO? Instead of bitching about them and how they run things, suggest an alternative solution to the world so that we may adopt it. believe me, people will be all ears and NS will have little ability to stop a change.
Unfortunately, the DNS system requires a central authority at some level, just like the IANA. In the case of the IANA, there is no presteige attached to network numbers, so nobody bitches. The IANA tries to do things fairly. When it comes to DNS, things are different, as there is so much weight attached to these letters. also:.com,.net, and.org are not your ONLY solutions, what about.us?.ca? What about your country domains? NS is only responsible for a *PART* of the DNS structure, a part that shouldn't even exist.. IMHO.
I hate monopolys, but *somebody* has to be the registrar. Nobody has come up with a realistic better way to handle DNS, so.... Why should network solutions do this at all when they could get sued by millions of people over something as rediculous as domain names? They only work because we choose to use DNS the way we do anyway. I, for one, say they should get the protection. If they misbehave badly, it's a simple matter to do something about it.
I *like* the RIO. It's not what I think of when I think of a portable mp3 player... but it's neat. However, I won't buy one unless it is about $100. If it is THAT limited in storage capacity, it's all solid-state, there are no expensive parts.. and the casing sucks.. why is it $200? ($320 CDN in the stores here). I'd LIKE to be able to toss one album on the rio before I go out for a ride, it should be cheap, durable, and... cheap.
Soon, someone will post 'Intel reveals 2Ghz Pentium-V chip with built in quantum-processing & biological intelligence matrix' and the general slashdot response will be: - Intel is just trying to force the software industry to make bulkier software so that we have to buy their stuff! - Intel is imprisoning an artificial life form in their chip and should be shot!
-- The P-III serial# is an *EXCELLENT* idea, they just marketed it wrong (as others have said, this is absolutely not something new.. just new to Intel's x86 stuff).. besides, if you are going to use an online service, they have the right to ask you who you are. It's up to you whether or not you want to tell them or not... The chip-ID could be protected as vigorously as your address book. (never mind that this isn't how it'll be used anyway)
What intel just said makes *GOOD* sense. They don't want vendors fraudulently selling high-end machines that aren't, that may fail. They don't want the bad publicity of people saying 'your fast chips aren't reliable'. They said they are *NOT* trying to stop people from overclocking chips, just to stop vendors from selling overclocked chips without notifying the customer.
No. The only act in question is the DHRA, The Digital Home Recording Act, from which computer peripherals are COMPLETELY EXEMPT. The beef with the rio, and others, is that *if* they fall under the act, they would have to follow the serial copy protection scheme (in CD audio, basically a 2 bit scheeme, one bit for 'original' and one bit for 'copyright'. If both bits are set, a copy can be made. if the copyright bit is set, but the original bit isn't, then the device is NOT supposed to copy. When a copy is made of an original, it must change the 'original' bit to 0. (this is my understanding) note that mp3 has these flags in it's header information, though we don't use them.
The device mentioned here (that probably doesn't even exist), would certainly *NOT* fall under the DHRA, as it is absolutely *NOT* a recorder. There are no other rules about 'audio playback devices', only recording devices. The recording industry wants control of recording, not playback, as one implies the other. If they control recording, they control distribution.
Note: Computers & Peripherals were exempted from the DHRA specifically so that the music industry wouldn't inhibit innovation in the computer industry. This hasn't changed, I think the computers are just getting smaller.
GPL is GPL is GPL. If they were based on GPL code, then of course it has to be available. That is not what is happening here, i'm not implying anything about sony.
How about we come up with a solution *BEFORE* we blast them off the net? Argument against monopoly? Geesus FRIG! People.... InterNIC is not a monoploy.. no more than IANA is a monopoly, no more than the Internet itself is a monopoly. We choose to use them by convention. It's unfortunate the way things are turning out... but the only thing that gives them *ANY* power is the fact that every nameserver out there has *by admin-configured choice* a list of root nameservers that get their info from InterNIC. Just as the IP structure of the internet only works because everyone cooperates... so works DNS.
The 'Internet' is really a bucketload of different, private and public networks that just happen to be using the same protocols and just happen to have all agreed on an addressing scheme that lets them co-exist when they all hook up to each other.
You know.. the.ca domain doesn't have this problem... you want a domain? It has to directly relate to your company/organization/person and there are rules about that. Why? To keep it fair.. not to squash copyright. Joe's fruit stand can't register fruit.ca, because it doesn't reflect joe. joesfruit.bc.ca works, because it reflects certain information. People might say it's a little restrictive.. but there is NO SCRAPPING YET! You can't lie about who you are and what domain you want without committing some act of fraud.. and so it should be! You can use the net.. big brother doesn't have to see you.. but if you want to be a permanent fixture... don't the networks involved desrve to know who you are?
We have allowed the domain name to become the single identifier of a net presence.. that is not how it should be at all.
Is there a better solution? I think this is the best approach we have *SO FAR*. Is there another way? Probably.. but this is all we have. We used to use shared/etc/hosts files... people should try to comprehend the vast size and nature of the DNS system. Everyone takes it for granted.. Go *learn* something about the protocols involved and the history of the net before judging so harshly.
I wouldn't want their job. Everyone is bitching about how they are running the InterNIC.... Okay. Someone please tell me what they SHOULD be doing. Class action law suits? Jeesus christ.. nobody has these fights about IP addresses.... and they are run the same way.
DOWN WITH THE IANA! THEY ARE A MONOPOLY! BOO! HISS! BAH!
The root nameservers do NOT have to run the way they do now.. and if the ocmpany trusted with managing the registrations can't do it, the net will pick another. I think people underestimate the scale of this project...
The problem, also, is that you can't OWN a domain. The registration fee wasn't for purchase, it was to pay the cost of running the registration service, which used to be funded by the US Govt.
I liked the proposal in the past for people who wanted to run registrations for different TLD's. There were technical requirements.... like you had to have the $$$ to support the registry... the infrastructure.... basically you had to be serious.
The solution is infinite ownerless TLDs.
on
NSI Loses Records
·
· Score: 1
Too complicated, though neat idea. The problem is DNS itself. Just like the IP structure.. the IANA says who gets what, but the don't enforce it.. that's up to the networks themselves. The IANA is just making it work.. and this doesn't represent a real problem, because numbers are numbers.. there is little prestige in numbers... especially because nobody sees them. The IANA handles logistics. How many are left. Where did they go. How do we effectively manage them? The DNS system, on the other hand, has too much commercial weight attached to it. To me, as an administrator, when the net was young, DNS meant a way to not have to type in bloody addresses all the time. It WASN'T the prime way to locate things. That was through other databases..... We refer to things by name, by URL... companies percieve that URL's = money. You can't OWN a domain! You can't OWN an IP address! The solution is one of databases. one to locate companies. One to locate services. One to relate them together. Another, to locate the physical servers or logical services that run them. Get hte picture? The guts get dirty, and the outsides are clean.
Slashdot Mirror
But no.. that's not quite how it works. .com, .org, .net, .edu, I dunno about .gov and .mil and .int, I think those are elsewhere). There is an agreed-upon convention as to who handles the different TLD's, meaning the country codes. InterNIC has no say in how .ca is run or how .us is run, that is up to the appropriate governing body. The IAB decides what the TLD structure is, don't they? InterNIC is just the registry for *some* of them. It is not up to NSI to decide to add new TLD's or anything like that.. they are just supposed to manage the ones they have. The world is by no means bound to stick to those.
InterNIC handles several of the TLD's (the common ones,
Really.
.com, .net, and .org are not your ONLY solutions, what about .us? .ca? What about your country domains? NS is only responsible for a *PART* of the DNS structure, a part that shouldn't even exist.. IMHO.
I've dealt with them MANY times, over MANY years.
I'm not saying nobody can do it better, I'm not even saying they are doing an adequate job.
I AM saying that SOMEONE has to do it. If not them, WHO? Instead of bitching about them and how they run things, suggest an alternative solution to the world so that we may adopt it. believe me, people will be all ears and NS will have little ability to stop a change.
Unfortunately, the DNS system requires a central authority at some level, just like the IANA. In the case of the IANA, there is no presteige attached to network numbers, so nobody bitches. The IANA tries to do things fairly. When it comes to DNS, things are different, as there is so much weight attached to these letters.
also:
I hate monopolys, but *somebody* has to be the registrar. Nobody has come up with a realistic better way to handle DNS, so....
Why should network solutions do this at all when they could get sued by millions of people over something as rediculous as domain names? They only work because we choose to use DNS the way we do anyway.
I, for one, say they should get the protection. If they misbehave badly, it's a simple matter to do something about it.
I *like* the RIO. It's not what I think of when I think of a portable mp3 player... but it's neat. ... cheap.
However, I won't buy one unless it is about $100.
If it is THAT limited in storage capacity, it's all solid-state, there are no expensive parts.. and the casing sucks.. why is it $200? ($320 CDN in the stores here). I'd LIKE to be able to toss one album on the rio before I go out for a ride, it should be cheap, durable, and
Soon, someone will post 'Intel reveals 2Ghz Pentium-V chip with built in quantum-processing & biological intelligence matrix' and the general slashdot response will be:
- Intel is just trying to force the software industry to make bulkier software so that we have to buy their stuff!
- Intel is imprisoning an artificial life form in their chip and should be shot!
--
The P-III serial# is an *EXCELLENT* idea, they just marketed it wrong (as others have said, this is absolutely not something new.. just new to Intel's x86 stuff).. besides, if you are going to use an online service, they have the right to ask you who you are. It's up to you whether or not you want to tell them or not... The chip-ID could be protected as vigorously as your address book. (never mind that this isn't how it'll be used anyway)
What intel just said makes *GOOD* sense. They don't want vendors fraudulently selling high-end machines that aren't, that may fail. They don't want the bad publicity of people saying 'your fast chips aren't reliable'.
They said they are *NOT* trying to stop people from overclocking chips, just to stop vendors from selling overclocked chips without notifying the customer.
No. The only act in question is the DHRA, The Digital Home Recording Act, from which computer peripherals are COMPLETELY EXEMPT.
The beef with the rio, and others, is that *if* they fall under the act, they would have to follow the serial copy protection scheme (in CD audio, basically a 2 bit scheeme, one bit for 'original' and one bit for 'copyright'. If both bits are set, a copy can be made. if the copyright bit is set, but the original bit isn't, then the device is NOT supposed to copy. When a copy is made of an original, it must change the 'original' bit to 0. (this is my understanding)
note that mp3 has these flags in it's header information, though we don't use them.
The device mentioned here (that probably doesn't even exist), would certainly *NOT* fall under the DHRA, as it is absolutely *NOT* a recorder. There are no other rules about 'audio playback devices', only recording devices. The recording industry wants control of recording, not playback, as one implies the other. If they control recording, they control distribution.
Note: Computers & Peripherals were exempted from the DHRA specifically so that the music industry wouldn't inhibit innovation in the computer industry. This hasn't changed, I think the computers are just getting smaller.
GPL is GPL is GPL. If they were based on GPL code, then of course it has to be available.
That is not what is happening here, i'm not implying anything about sony.
How about we come up with a solution *BEFORE* we blast them off the net?
.ca domain doesn't have this problem... you want a domain? It has to directly relate to your company/organization/person and there are rules about that. Why? To keep it fair.. not to squash copyright. Joe's fruit stand can't register fruit.ca, because it doesn't reflect joe. joesfruit.bc.ca works, because it reflects certain information. People might say it's a little restrictive.. but there is NO SCRAPPING YET! You can't lie about who you are and what domain you want without committing some act of fraud.. and so it should be! You can use the net.. big brother doesn't have to see you.. but if you want to be a permanent fixture... don't the networks involved desrve to know who you are?
/etc/hosts files... people should try to comprehend the vast size and nature of the DNS system. Everyone takes it for granted.. Go *learn* something about the protocols involved and the history of the net before judging so harshly.
Argument against monopoly?
Geesus FRIG!
People....
InterNIC is not a monoploy.. no more than IANA is a monopoly, no more than the Internet itself is a monopoly. We choose to use them by convention. It's unfortunate the way things are turning out... but the only thing that gives them *ANY* power is the fact that every nameserver out there has *by admin-configured choice* a list of root nameservers that get their info from InterNIC.
Just as the IP structure of the internet only works because everyone cooperates... so works DNS.
The 'Internet' is really a bucketload of different, private and public networks that just happen to be using the same protocols and just happen to have all agreed on an addressing scheme that lets them co-exist when they all hook up to each other.
You know.. the
We have allowed the domain name to become the single identifier of a net presence.. that is not how it should be at all.
Is there a better solution? I think this is the best approach we have *SO FAR*.
Is there another way? Probably.. but this is all we have. We used to use shared
I wouldn't want their job.
Everyone is bitching about how they are running the InterNIC....
Okay.
Someone please tell me what they SHOULD be doing.
Class action law suits? Jeesus christ.. nobody has these fights about IP addresses.... and they are run the same way.
DOWN WITH THE IANA! THEY ARE A MONOPOLY! BOO! HISS! BAH!
The root nameservers do NOT have to run the way they do now.. and if the ocmpany trusted with managing the registrations can't do it, the net will pick another. I think people underestimate the scale of this project...
The problem, also, is that you can't OWN a domain.
The registration fee wasn't for purchase, it was to pay the cost of running the registration service, which used to be funded by the US Govt.
I liked the proposal in the past for people who wanted to run registrations for different TLD's. There were technical requirements.... like you had to have the $$$ to support the registry... the infrastructure....
basically you had to be serious.
Too complicated, though neat idea.
The problem is DNS itself. Just like the IP structure.. the IANA says who gets what, but the don't enforce it.. that's up to the networks themselves. The IANA is just making it work.. and this doesn't represent a real problem, because numbers are numbers.. there is little prestige in numbers... especially because nobody sees them. The IANA handles logistics. How many are left. Where did they go. How do we effectively manage them?
The DNS system, on the other hand, has too much commercial weight attached to it.
To me, as an administrator, when the net was young, DNS meant a way to not have to type in bloody addresses all the time. It WASN'T the prime way to locate things. That was through other databases.....
We refer to things by name, by URL... companies percieve that URL's = money. You can't OWN a domain! You can't OWN an IP address! The solution is one of databases. one to locate companies. One to locate services. One to relate them together. Another, to locate the physical servers or logical services that run them.
Get hte picture? The guts get dirty, and the outsides are clean.
DOH!
--
wooga.