Re: [dnsext] draft-diao-aip-dns

Yes, here is a super-root in this draft in mathematical sense. It is the way to smoothly transfer to AIP DNS and provides DNS resolution among all these AIP networks. If we provide the domain name suffix, common sense is available globally. It satisfies the two essentail perconditions in RFC 2826:
   -  The existence of a common symbol set, and
   -  The existence of a common semantic interpretation of these
      symbols.

But in practical you can run your own root in each AIP network. It provides automony and extensibility. 

Technically, it is extensible choice for countries, global operators, and specific internet networks such as Things of Internet.

Of course, there are more other applications as you need.

Diao Yongping
20120701

--- On Mon, 6/18/12, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:

> From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
> Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-diao-aip-dns
> To: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
> Cc: "Ond?ej Surý" <ondrej.sury@nic.cz>, teacherdddd@yahoo.com.cn, dnsext@ietf.org, 644247110@qq.com, diaoyp@yahoo.com
> Date: Monday, June 18, 2012, 8:49 PM
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 03:12:38PM
> +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> 
> > The I-D does not split the DNS at all. It plays with
> words by
> > pretending it will allow several roots but this is not
> true. Instead,
> > it creates a super-root (the one which will allocate
> the AIPs, the .A
> > and .B in the examples) and therefore just displaces
> the (real)
> > problems to the super-root.
> 
> I completely agree, and I think that issue is the
> fundamental problem
> with the draft.
> 
> We do not need a single root for some political or
> organizational
> reason; lots of things get along without that.  But the
> DNS is a tree
> in the mathematical sense.  It is _incoherent_ to say
> that you can
> have multiple roots in such a tree.  If you have
> multiple roots, that
> just means that you're not yet at the root, properly
> described.
> You're merely at an apex.
> 
> Some of the draft is hard to understand because its prose
> needs work;
> that is a mere matter of editing.  But a portion of the
> draft will
> never be possible to understand, because it is trying to
> hide the
> fundamental confusion at its core.  A muddled idea can
> never be clear,
> even once it is clear how muddled the idea is.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
> 
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext