Brian Reid once commented that the "the problem with the DNS mess is that all the players have such bizarre personalities" and Eugene was certainly no exception; he was both the best and the worst of it. He innovated, built the first alt root server network and got the message out there in a way nobody else did, but when he hijacked the internic the trust factor evaporated literally overnight and everybody switched back the next day. By "everybody" I mean ISPs and companies, a few individuals didn't. And it wouldn't have been so bad if this had just affected alternic, but it didn't, nobody trusted any alternative root ever again. He both created and killed that movement.
When it worked it worked and worked well and was so transparen to the user even the ICANN people used it and didn't even realize they were sending mail to "newdom@alter.nic" - it just worked.
Vixie went out of his way to kill it after that, his web proxy checked DNS, so even if you used your own dns servers and made a request of an IP address, if the web cache at your isp didn't agree with the DNS you got a 404, instead of a document from a website you already had an IP for.
This of course seldom comes up in "net neutrality" discussions; the NN folks think this is acceptible. It's not of course, it's hypocrisy. Everyone is big on NN except their special case/vested interest.
Because the alternative root will let you see the rest of the net that the US Government censors. The point is not to give you a different com/net/org/whatever, it's to give you those plus the others.
Keep in mind when ICANN was formed slashdot's reaction was "this might not be so bad, they should be given a chnace" despite the fact what is happening now was predicted by some, way back then.
You can't have been there. I was and I can tell you ICANN was a behind the scenes end run around the geeks by a bunch of corporate types and lawyers from the get-go.
That's not actually what happened. Eugene was working in Toronto at the time, but he's lost funding and went back to Oregon, got drunk and hijacked the Internic out of anger. When he realized what he'd done the next day he drove around going "oh shit oh shit" in the US for a while, then went back to Canada. He knew they'd get him, but he wasn't gonna make it painfully easy for them. He was picked up when he stepped out to smoke a bowl of hash on Queen st. They sort of ignored that. He spent the next few weeks (and xmas) in prison on Canada, then was extradited to the US, made a deal with the feds to explain how he did it to Mark Kosterrs of NSI so they could fix it, and got probation for, I think, a year. He went back to work for iname/name.com where he worked long enough to make a mil or so in stock then took off in a boat for a couple of years.
Goddamit I was trying to forget about those years. (shakes head) Eugene (rolls eyes)
They stole.biz from Leah Gallagos. Karl Denninger originally deployed it, then Leah took it over, then ICANN told somebody else to run and it accused Leah of "duplicating" it.
That's right, the person that came first was accused by ICANN of "duplicating" the "real one".
At the time they said "oh it was in an alteritive root, it doesn't count". But you'll note there are now 13 "ICANN sanctioned alternative roots" that acts as testbeds for international domains.
That is, some tlds are in alternbative roots before they go into the ICANN roots.
But these are ones that pay into the ICANN ecosystem.
Follow the money.
Look especially at the 990's of ISOC and PIR and ICANN. They're out there if you look.
Yeah the difference is, 15 years ago we had no compelling content. While people did switch in some small percent, and could see http://free.tibet/ or http://watch.gallery/ it was more of an experiment than anything else.
TBB and Wikileaks might be the compelling content to give it critical mass though. We'll see.
"Messy. Question: which root do you ask for google.com? All of them? What if they reply with different addresses."
What if they don't? Can we agree that would work?
(Besides, you don't ask "the root" for "google.com" you ask it for the pointers (NS records) to.com, then you ask those servers for the pointers to google.com.)
It makes sense. Anybody who trusts TPB to use it for a referral link obviously trusts it enough to use DNS to get there.
The pirate party has reps in the EU parliment, who do good work on matters of international policy with issues other than IP rights. Freeing up patents on pharmecuticals so poor aids patients can afford medicine for example.
While some poeple think "pirate" means stealing other poeples stuff, some think it means resisting the corporatocracy.
The "pirates" of old may not have been what you think either and may find some reading up on this kinda interesting.
It was started with a loan floated by Jones Day arranged by Joe Sims. Jones Day has since made gazillions on legal fees. Since then it's been funded by... you. A portion of every domain name sold funds ICANN. Their oversight is NTIA/US Department of Commerce. Their oversight is the US Congress.
"I used to, in 1996, use AltDNS which is sort of what is proposed now. It failed, but the actions of government have shown we need a better DNS that is not subject to the actions of a single government. (e.g. dot com is a very bad idea!... why isnt each countries own root dotcom dependant on geo!"
The alt.dns you used to use still lives. It's just hiding on Tatooine. And has a sister.
When the USG pulls Wikileaks plug it might be time to break out the light sabres.
Wildcarding DNS and redirecting "no such domain" (NXDOMAIN) queries has an interesting history.
First.ws did it. ICANN did nothing. Then NSI/Verisign did it. People complained. They made them stop doing it. Then more cctlds did it. Then ISP's did it.
At this point, everyone does it, except Verisign. Which is really weird casue there's a clause in the NSI/ICANN agreement that says ICANN can't treat NSI/Verisign any differently from any other TLD and they apparntly are in this case.
All he needs to do is have one TLD not controlled by ICANN (like the rest of them are) and have a network of root servers that have all the legacy tlds plus this one extra one. This isn't new, (see.tor) in fact there have been alternative root networks for 15 years.
Those that need to use them know how. And they work and have ever since 96 or so.
Wikileaks is probably gonna need the same thing. I can't see the US government letting them continue to use their DNS.
This has nothing to do with "a competing.com registry".
"This is removing items from the Root DNS server."
Not really. The root DNS servers have pointers (NS records) to the top level domains (com/net/org...) servers.
What they're proposing doing is a fast track way to remove entries from the tld servers. Removing entries from the root servers would make entire top-level-domains unusable.
An alternative root server won't help you here, they just have extra top level domains. A working alterative would be another set of com/net/org servers. Good luck with that, that's a lot of work for no money.
Besides, all they're doing is yanking a domain name. You can still use an IP address. Or you can use (and a light should go on here) a domain in the.arpa zone, which can't be yanked. They work. I've tried it. What would be nice is if somebody could rig the lame-ass icann system to accept names in the arpa zone as nameservers - they never expire.
As for V6... I dunno. There's a non-zero chance something else will pop up and get used, we're in our second decade o this turkey and the only poeple that believe in it are the ones with a vested interest in its success.
If noting else we can use the multicast space. There's a gazillion V4 addresses "reserved by IANA" that are never going to be used for multicast and can be recycled.
The CRTC is the only thing between us and Bell doing what it wants. It's all very well to say you want to dissolve it, but you need to replace it with something better. Got that organization built?
Look at the way the US Department of Commerce split up Network Solutions in the same kind of monopoly situation they had with.com. If we're a socialist country how come we have a less socialist model than even the US when it comes to critical infrastructure?
I'm a computer engineer and have been on the net since 86 or so, and in theory know what I'm doing.
Within days of Netflix opening up here in Canadia I subscribed. This was in the third week of September. Clever that, as it's not gonna show up on Septembers ISP bill - you can't use that much bandwidth in a week of movies no matter how chronic you are.
But in the first week of October I suddenly realized, "whoa - I bet these 4 movies a day aren't sustainable given the cable co's 60G cap" and when I checked, sure enough, I'd have gone over that cap around the 2-3rd week of October if I hadn't curtailed it severely. One movie is between 1.3 and 2.6G, an HD movie is way more.
God help anybody that just used Netflix flat out. Worst case (*cough*Rogers*cough*) they could be looking at hundreds of dollars to watch those "free" movies. A 60G cap is tight if you really use the connection.
P.S. Watch Raajneeti. It's one of the coolest films ever. Watch "Wake up Sid" to warm up.
Slashdot Mirror
That article is supposed to prove they were just sociopathic feminists and the CIA had nothing to do with it?
Methinks thou protest too much.
Brian Reid once commented that the "the problem with the DNS mess is that all the players have such bizarre personalities" and Eugene was certainly no exception; he was both the best and the worst of it. He innovated, built the first alt root server network and got the message out there in a way nobody else did, but when he hijacked the internic the trust factor evaporated literally overnight and everybody switched back the next day. By "everybody" I mean ISPs and companies, a few individuals didn't. And it wouldn't have been so bad if this had just affected alternic, but it didn't, nobody trusted any alternative root ever again. He both created and killed that movement.
When it worked it worked and worked well and was so transparen to the user even the ICANN people used it and didn't even realize they were sending mail to "newdom@alter.nic" - it just worked.
Vixie went out of his way to kill it after that, his web proxy checked DNS, so even if you used your own dns servers and made a request of an IP address, if the web cache at your isp didn't agree with the DNS you got a 404, instead of a document from a website you already had an IP for.
This of course seldom comes up in "net neutrality" discussions; the NN folks think this is acceptible. It's not of course, it's hypocrisy. Everyone is big on NN except their special case/vested interest.
Because the alternative root will let you see the rest of the net that the US Government censors. The point is not to give you a different com/net/org/whatever, it's to give you those plus the others.
Keep in mind when ICANN was formed slashdot's reaction was "this might not be so bad, they should be given a chnace" despite the fact what is happening now was predicted by some, way back then.
Exactly.
This is already in the works at;
http://dot-p2p.org/index.php?title=Main_Page .p2p will soon be incorporated into OpenNIC.
^^No other post on this page matters. This is the one to pay attention to, folks.
You can't have been there. I was and I can tell you ICANN was a behind the scenes end run around the geeks by a bunch of corporate types and lawyers from the get-go.
no, not dnssec, dnscurve
That's not actually what happened. Eugene was working in Toronto at the time, but he's lost funding and went back to Oregon, got drunk and hijacked the Internic out of anger. When he realized what he'd done the next day he drove around going "oh shit oh shit" in the US for a while, then went back to Canada. He knew they'd get him, but he wasn't gonna make it painfully easy for them. He was picked up when he stepped out to smoke a bowl of hash on Queen st. They sort of ignored that. He spent the next few weeks (and xmas) in prison on Canada, then was extradited to the US, made a deal with the feds to explain how he did it to Mark Kosterrs of NSI so they could fix it, and got probation for, I think, a year. He went back to work for iname/name.com where he worked long enough to make a mil or so in stock then took off in a boat for a couple of years.
Goddamit I was trying to forget about those years. (shakes head) Eugene (rolls eyes)
"And the ICANN did not steal any domain"
They stole .biz from Leah Gallagos. Karl Denninger originally deployed it, then Leah took it over, then ICANN told somebody else to run and it accused Leah of "duplicating" it.
That's right, the person that came first was accused by ICANN of "duplicating" the "real one".
At the time they said "oh it was in an alteritive root, it doesn't count". But you'll note there are now 13 "ICANN sanctioned alternative roots" that acts as testbeds for international domains.
That is, some tlds are in alternbative roots before they go into the ICANN roots.
But these are ones that pay into the ICANN ecosystem.
Follow the money.
Look especially at the 990's of ISOC and PIR and ICANN. They're out there if you look.
Yeah the difference is, 15 years ago we had no compelling content. While people did switch in some small percent, and could see http://free.tibet/ or http://watch.gallery/ it was more of an experiment than anything else.
TBB and Wikileaks might be the compelling content to give it critical mass though. We'll see.
Discussions are already underway.
There are thirteen root server addresses. There are hundreds of physical root servers behind those. Vixie has been working on this for over a decade.
It almost works now, too.
"Messy. Question: which root do you ask for google.com? All of them? What if they reply with different addresses."
What if they don't? Can we agree that would work?
(Besides, you don't ask "the root" for "google.com" you ask it for the pointers (NS records) to .com, then you ask those servers for the pointers to google.com.)
It makes sense. Anybody who trusts TPB to use it for a referral link obviously trusts it enough to use DNS to get there.
The pirate party has reps in the EU parliment, who do good work on matters of international policy with issues other than IP rights. Freeing up patents on pharmecuticals so poor aids patients can afford medicine for example.
While some poeple think "pirate" means stealing other poeples stuff, some think it means resisting the corporatocracy.
The "pirates" of old may not have been what you think either and may find some reading up on this kinda interesting.
ICANN isn't government funded. Never has been.
It was started with a loan floated by Jones Day arranged by Joe Sims. Jones Day has since made gazillions on legal fees. Since then it's been funded by... you. A portion of every domain name sold funds ICANN. Their oversight is NTIA/US Department of Commerce. Their oversight is the US Congress.
"I used to, in 1996, use AltDNS which is sort of what is proposed now. It failed, but the actions of government have shown we need a better DNS that is not subject to the actions of a single government. (e.g. dot com is a very bad idea!... why isnt each countries own root dotcom dependant on geo!"
The alt.dns you used to use still lives. It's just hiding on Tatooine. And has a sister.
When the USG pulls Wikileaks plug it might be time to break out the light sabres.
Wildcarding DNS and redirecting "no such domain" (NXDOMAIN) queries has an interesting history.
First .ws did it. ICANN did nothing.
Then NSI/Verisign did it. People complained. They made them stop doing it.
Then more cctlds did it.
Then ISP's did it.
At this point, everyone does it, except Verisign. Which is really weird casue there's a clause in the NSI/ICANN agreement that says ICANN can't treat NSI/Verisign any differently from any other TLD and they apparntly are in this case.
All he needs to do is have one TLD not controlled by ICANN (like the rest of them are) and have a network of root servers that have all the legacy tlds plus this one extra one. This isn't new, (see .tor) in fact there have been alternative root networks for 15 years.
Those that need to use them know how. And they work and have ever since 96 or so.
Wikileaks is probably gonna need the same thing. I can't see the US government letting them continue to use their DNS.
This has nothing to do with "a competing .com registry".
Allow the tld and you've opted in. Disallow it and you haven't. What could be simpler?
Wait, how does the sculptor know? Did they give him the plaintext and say "oh, btw, here's the ci[her you have to use, we want it encrypted".
Is he a sculptor that did a lot of "commissions" in South America and Eastern Europe?
"This is removing items from the Root DNS server."
Not really. The root DNS servers have pointers (NS records) to the top level domains (com/net/org...) servers.
What they're proposing doing is a fast track way to remove entries from the tld servers. Removing entries from the root servers would make entire top-level-domains unusable.
An alternative root server won't help you here, they just have extra top level domains. A working alterative would be another set of com/net/org servers. Good luck with that, that's a lot of work for no money.
Besides, all they're doing is yanking a domain name. You can still use an IP address. Or you can use (and a light should go on here) a domain in the .arpa zone, which can't be yanked. They work. I've tried it. What would be nice is if somebody could rig the lame-ass icann system to accept names in the arpa zone as nameservers - they never expire.
"Godfather of the web" ? (facepalm)
As for V6... I dunno. There's a non-zero chance something else will pop up and get used, we're in our second decade o this turkey and the only poeple that believe in it are the ones with a vested interest in its success.
If noting else we can use the multicast space. There's a gazillion V4 addresses "reserved by IANA" that are never going to be used for multicast and can be recycled.
"CompuServe removed the little "newsgroups" button..."
'bout time. ...ihnpss!gryphon!richard
The CRTC is the only thing between us and Bell doing what it wants. It's all very well to say you want to dissolve it, but you need to replace it with something better. Got that organization built?
I'm down. Can we take PetroCan back too?
Look at the way the US Department of Commerce split up Network Solutions in the same kind of monopoly situation they had with .com. If we're a socialist country how come we have a less socialist model than even the US when it comes to critical infrastructure?
I'm a computer engineer and have been on the net since 86 or so, and in theory know what I'm doing.
Within days of Netflix opening up here in Canadia I subscribed. This was in the third week of September. Clever that, as it's not gonna show up on Septembers ISP bill - you can't use that much bandwidth in a week of movies no matter how chronic you are.
But in the first week of October I suddenly realized, "whoa - I bet these 4 movies a day aren't sustainable given the cable co's 60G cap" and when I checked, sure enough, I'd have gone over that cap around the 2-3rd week of October if I hadn't curtailed it severely. One movie is between 1.3 and 2.6G, an HD movie is way more.
God help anybody that just used Netflix flat out. Worst case (*cough*Rogers*cough*) they could be looking at hundreds of dollars to watch those "free" movies. A 60G cap is tight if you really use the connection.
P.S. Watch Raajneeti. It's one of the coolest films ever. Watch "Wake up Sid" to warm up.