[DNSOP] Re: An Interplanetary DNS Model

[Scott Johnson <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lorenzo,

On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, Lorenzo Breda wrote:

> 
> 
> Il giorno mer 24 lug 2024 alle ore 09:02 Scott Johnson
> <[e-mail]> ha scritto:
>       Hi Lorenzo,
> 
> [omissis]
> 
> Pardon the background tangent;
> 
> 
> It was pretty interesting.

Glad you enjoyed it.

>  
>       I will now address your point regarding
>       valid URIs in one network becoming invalid URIs in another,
>       and how this
>       can be addressed.  As noted above, there are two places, BP
>       network
>       ingress and egress, in which there is a break in segmented
>       (HTTPS/IP<-BPSEC/BP->HTTPS/IP) protection.  It is at this
>       place where
>       tampering could take place.  I don't see this as a bug, but
>       a feature.
>       This is the place where we take the IP payload, turn it
>       into a BP payload,
>       and extract data from the application headers to be placed
>       in a BP
>       extension block, which is used to construct the remote
>       request. This can
>       also be the place where .earth can be appended to any url
>       in the body of
>       an email or web page, etc destined for somewhere other than
>       Earth.  Don't
>       get me wrong;  I am no fan of deep packet inspection, or
>       breaking privacy
>       or integrity.  This model is designed to ensure
>       cryptographic protection
>       throughout the "on-wire" delivery, but operational
>       constraints dictate
>       that this happens in a segmented fashion.
> 
> 
> Deep packet inspection is a technical issue, rather than a "merely"
> governance one. The inspection/correction system would need to have a
> pretty good knowledge about the structure of the transmission,

Pretty simple since a BP enabled IP listener for each service we want to 
support will need to be crafted, i.e. the BP enabled MTA will understand 
that it is receiving SMTP destined for a different world.

> it would
> be break signatures (eg on API payloads and on emails,

Funny you should mention email, as I am in the process of constructing a 
working implementation in a dedicated multi-world simulation network. I 
don't see smtp to be so difficult.  The rest of the more modern functions 
tangental to smtp, like DMARC, smtps, etc. can come after this return to 
first principles.

API payloads?  Via what delivery?  http(s)?  Not breaking that would come 
down to good parsing.  As I have said before, attention will be required 
to individual protocols we wish to make work across these networks.  Do 
not expect the full level of functionality you enjoy on low latency, high 
speed, reliable links on Earth; at least initially.

> which both are
> useful applications on the system you described


> - emails are
> unexpectedly surviving any evolution of the Internet)

Exactly, and e-mail to the Moon is a near term goal.

> and it wouldn't
> work on transmissions which are encrypted on a message level (encrypted
> documents, emails).

Again, users who are encrypting messages will understand the "country 
code" analogy, IMHO.  It is rocket science, after all :)


> 
> Why are you against leaving the current TLDs implicitly on Earth by
> default?

Why do you think I am.  Just to be sure, can you expound on what that 
means, exactly?  Use only new, discrete TLDs on other worlds?  I have no 
problem with that.  I have already been willing to back off a new TLD on 
Earth because of the cost/paperwork/etc necessary.  Given that we can map 
3rd level domains to the same hierarchy to access off world resources, 
with no change necessary to the terrestrial DNS, it was a technical 
solution that worked and prevented having to run the ICANN gauntlet 
with a dump truck full of cash.

If someone provides a few paragraphs on this proposal, and what it means, 
I will be happy to amend the draft and acknowledge the contribution, if 
it passes technical muster.  I almost never object to well explained good 
ideas :)

Scott


> 
> --
> Lorenzo Breda
> 
>