[p2p-sip] Fwd: what's wrong with DNS?

huang-ming.pan at comcast.net (Peter Pan) Thu, 23 November 2006 02:16 UTC

From: "huang-ming.pan at comcast.net"
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 18:16:35 -0800
Subject: [p2p-sip] Fwd: what's wrong with DNS?
References: <014201c70e91$eb8b2500$0202a8c0@Quinthar>
Message-ID: <000901c70ea5$67209610$030aa8c0@comcast.net>

Cannot live with web browsing without DNS.

However, to decentralize p2p-sip with best efforts, is it possible that DNS
is used ONLY IN CASE for "evacuation" purpose?

BTW, it seems to me that Skype uses NO DNS on (super)node lookup.

Also, Skype could do authentication without DNS, IMHO.

Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Barrett" <dbarrett at quinthar.com>
To: "'Michael Slavitch'" <slavitch at gmail.com>; "'Henry Sinnreich'"
<hsinnrei at adobe.com>; "'P2P-SIP'" <p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] Fwd: what's wrong with DNS?


> > On 11/22/06, Henry Sinnreich <hsinnrei at adobe.com> wrote:
> > > >- Invent some P2P-DNS to handle the remaining 1%
> > >
> > > I suppose we can also add Skype with its >100M users to the 1%  ;-)>
>
> Skype depends wholly and entirely on DNS for the first and most critical
> function: authentication.
>
> So, let's put those 100M users solidly back in the "utterly dependent upon
> DNS" category.  Indeed, even if Skype didn't so completely rely on
globally
> hosted central servers, that's not my point: the point I'm trying to make
is
> all Skype users *do* have reliable access to DNS, and so will a
> hypermajority of P2P-SIP users.
>
> Again, the number of users who will not have access to DNS is
infinitesimal.
> Even an extreme "disaster" network will get DNS quickly, and an "ad hoc"
> network of nodes 20 feet away from each other is better served by talking
> REALLY LOUD.  Anybody sufficiently prepared to establish a long-range
> fixed-wireless point-to-point network could easily set up a private DNS
> server (and indeed, would probably have one already).
>
> Thus rather than inventing a new DNS and making it specific only to VoIP,
> why not just use the existing DNS, and then figure out how to extend DNS
> into the incredibly rare networks where it isn't already available?
>
> -david
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2p-sip mailing list
> p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip