Re: [DNSOP] In a vacuum, nobody can hear you scream, was On the call for adoption on Special Use Names

Jeremy Rand <> Tue, 04 October 2016 16:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 343491293DF for <>; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8FNAY0jE8yYs for <>; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E44DB127735 for <>; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
References: <20161004031354.11827.qmail@ary.lan> <>
From: Jeremy Rand <>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 16:59:20 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="aKbJeO8F3DD8Kgv4S7Nl7SKHnPKqjEXfE"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] In a vacuum, nobody can hear you scream, was On the call for adoption on Special Use Names
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2016 16:59:44 -0000

David Conrad:
> The P2P crowd would like to carve out some 
> names to run their resolution scheme in parallel with the DNS, and it 
> appears they'd also like an authority they can point at. 
> Well, some do. To be honest, it feels to me that some appear to want to say "we don't like ICANN" or, more generally, "Screw you, Establishment!" 

Hope I'm not stepping on any toes by joining this discussion, but I'd be
surprised if those sentiments were coming from any Namecoin people.  The
Namecoin developers are well aware that Namecoin makes different
tradeoffs from DNS, and that there are plenty of ways that Namecoin is
inferior to DNS as managed by ICANN.  We're actively attempting to
minimize those deficiencies within our design constraints, but some of
the issues are open research problems that may or may not have a
solution.  As such, I hear Namecoin people criticize Namecoin's
technology far more often than I hear them criticize ICANN.

We're trying to build something cool, not tear down ICANN.

(Maybe you were talking about some other P2P naming project, in which
case I apologize for entering this conversation.)

-Jeremy Rand
(Namecoin developer)