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

[hsinnrei at adobe.com (Henry Sinnreich)]

>except it would use dynamic DNS instead of a DHT

 

This is a terrible idea.

 

P2P overlays are supposed to work even when disconnected from the big Internet and besides, have their own name space.

 

Peers can act as proxies to connect the overlay to DNS and ENUM. 

 

(BTW: In the trapezoid model, adding the outgoing SIP proxy lookup to an ENUM lookup gives you total of 6 (six) DNS lookups).

 

DNS needs some improvements too as argued in 

 

http://codeen.cs.princeton.edu/codns/ <http://codeen.cs.princeton.edu/codns/> 

 

Thanks, Henry

 

________________________________

From: p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu [mailto:p2p-sip-bounces at cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Adam Fisk
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 9:42 AM
To: Gustavo Garc?a Bernardo
Cc: p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] what's wrong with DNS?

 

No -- I'm talking about continuing to have non-firewalled nodes act as registrars and proxies.  So, you still have a voluntary, fully distributed system.  In fact, it would be just as decentralized as the current vision for p2p SIP, except it would use dynamic DNS instead of a DHT. 

-Adam

On 11/20/06, Gustavo Garc?a Bernardo <ggb at tid.es> wrote:

> > I had a conversation with Paul Francis at the recent
> > networking conference
> > at NYU.  I brought up p2p SIP and the implementation
> > of it I've been working
> > on, and he said "What's wrong with DNS?" 
> > Specifically, with dynamic DNS.  I
> > didn't understand his point at first because my work
> > incorporates HTTP web
> > servers, and I thought he missed that you still need
> > SIP/STUN/TURN/ICE to 
> > negotiate the NATs.  He was talking about for the
> > registrars, though.  If
> > your registrar goes down for, say,
> > sip:afisk at mysubdomain.p2psip.org , and I
> > get a new one, why not just use dynamic DNS to remap
> > mysubdomain.p2psip.orgto the new registrar?

That solution continues being centralized (you are only changing the
registrar when the main goes down), you aren't getting the advantages of P2P 
like zero infrastructure, load distribution among nodes, working in
isolated/ad-hoc environments...

> Also, it is entirely possible to build a P2P system
> that simply let you register names in a subtree of the 
> DNS. For example, the PNRP feature in Vista allows
> each Vista host to publish a name of the form
> "JohnDoe.pnrp.net", or a secure variant thereof,
> according to Noah Horton's blog
> (http://blogs.msdn.com/noahh/archive/2006/08/23/715894.aspx)
> Once you can publish a DNS name, running SIP appears 
> rather simple, right?

As far as I know, PNRP uses a DHT like algorithm.  PNRP doesn't register
anything in DNS despite of the fact that it employs IDs like DNS ones
(subdomain.domain).

> -- Karst 
>


G.

> __________________________________________________________________________
> __________
> Sponsored Link
>
> $420k for $1,399/mo.
> Think You Pay Too Much For Your Mortgage? 
> Find Out! www.LowerMyBills.com/lre
> _______________________________________________
> p2p-sip mailing list
> p2p-sip at cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/p2p-sip

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/p2p-sip/attachments/20061120/4dbd40ac/attachment-0001.html