IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] draft-licanhuang-dnsop-urnresolution-00

Lican Huang <huang_lican@yahoo.co.uk> Tue, 04 December 2007 04:27 UTC

Return-path: <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzPNF-0006X6-HU; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:27:09 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzPNE-0006Vo-5O for dnsop@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:27:08 -0500
Received: from web26407.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.146.176.31]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzPND-0001AY-7n for dnsop@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:27:08 -0500
Received: (qmail 59353 invoked by uid 60001); 4 Dec 2007 04:27:06 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.uk; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=sE4r1QIcDI6Gv5yvkhn2RbhVDKJlrpqztJMathnOBDZp/k4X7odG633g5niDMRPtb83irCf/Td/PKbKQQQPsYTk435cyr1l3tZUi95kt/kItebyCF2riAN+54KhvR4vpZtA8j1gySJmN6CBZYxngA/7dmlzv5Q7ApJ1CYBH5voM=;
X-YMail-OSG: CPhM0MsVM1lB.0WKbfqtNPtfPUeAPZV_4DQfdrcV_hB5AwPd3l13qio67VFBM1crmxSO5Vj5e3ErToq0AX2LD2.NNO8cdfN.3.uctGs77D6v
Received: from [219.82.162.118] by web26407.mail.ukl.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 04:27:06 GMT
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 04:27:06 +0000
From: Lican Huang <huang_lican@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-licanhuang-dnsop-urnresolution-00
To: Mohsen Souissi <mohsen.souissi@nic.fr>, licanhuang@zist.edu.cn
In-Reply-To: <20071203204459.GA73670@kerkenna.nic.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <581789.57272.qm@web26407.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0a7aa2e6e558383d84476dc338324fab
Cc: IETF DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1007354199=="
Errors-To: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org

When Ipv4 addresses will be Exhausted in the near future and the next generation Intenert( Ipv6) will take over,  DNS names will also be exhausted soon with the increase of  hosts and users.     Lenny Foner  has pointed other disadvantage in the today's DNS.
  Please see the section of "What's broken?" in the article of Lenny Foner in 
  http://www.cfp2000.org/workshop/materials/projects-dns.html.
   
  Domain Names in DNS must have some human-understanding meaning it,  otherwise, we can just use IP addresses or numerials for the names.  In other words, if we use     human-not-understanding  Names in DNS, the DNS system can be throwed away.
   
  The draft namespace is different with the today's DNS namespace. But,  due to the exhaustion of Names in DNS in the near future, The DNS will add new domains.
  Why adding new domain names with semantic meaning in the future?
   
  This draft can be used for search the locatons of the resources if the DNS using classified hierarchical  Domain Names. 
   
  Mohsen Souissi <mohsen.souissi@nic.fr> wrote:
  I have read the I-D as well and I second Joe's point of view and his arguments below.

Mohsen.

On 03 Dec, Joe Abley wrote:
| Hi,
| 
| I have read your draft, draft-licanhuang-dnsop-urnresolution-00.
| 
| The question was raised just now in the dnsop working group meeting in 
| Vancouver as to whether the content of this draft was suitable for 
| adoption as a working group item. The question was triggered by the 
| presence of "dnsop" in the draft name.
| 
| I have read your document. I do not believe it is a suitable basis for 
| a dnsop working group item. Specifically:
| 
| 1. The document describes a namespace which is substantially different 
| form what is available in the DNS today. The existing DNS namespace is 
| not addressed at all.
| 
| 2. The document seems to address an extension to (or an application 
| for) the protocol described in draft-licanhuang-dnsop-distributeddns, 
| which (to this reader) seems clearly not to be "the DNS", at least any 
| conventional meaning of that term.


       
---------------------------------
 Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! for Good
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email