[ga] "...who found their address in DNS records..."
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <email@example.com>
"...who found their address in DNS records..."
Do you mean "found their address in *whois records* or DNS records" ?
Are you aware that the whois database is normally separate from the DNS database ?
Are you aware that information in the whois could be totally incoherent but the DNS can continue
because it may have data which is different ?
Are you aware that you can make queries directly to the DNS servers without ever consulting whois servers ?
Are you aware that you do not need to ask root servers where TLD clusters are ?
Are you aware that you can ask TLD servers who the members of their cluster are ?
Have you looked for the TLD clusters for the new .INFO TLD ?
Who operates .INFO ?...this month...
Continuing....do you believe that a person (or computer) could take the following line and
select a random IP address (instead of 220.127.116.11) and provide a list of thousands of TLDs (instead of .INFO)
and they could eventually locate and lock onto all of the TLDs that are operational....?
Once locked on to those TLDs, then, could a person remember the IP addresses for those TLD servers
and use those IP addresses, instead of random addresses, to make future queries to refresh information about
the TLD clusters ?
Once a popular TLD is located, like .INFO, could other TLD clusters be located by asking the .INFO
servers about other TLDs in a "neighborhood" ?...or a ring of 9 TLDs...
3:216 SVK (SLOVAKIA-(Slovak-Republic))
3:217 DNK (DENMARK)
3:218 GRC (GREECE)
3:221 SVN (SLOVENIA)
Do you agree that these queries to the working DNS servers (not the whois servers) represent the most
up-to-date view of what is in the DNS and could bear no relationship to contractual agreements or other
marketing spin coming from I* society members or U.S. Government employees ?
Considering another approach, are you aware that people "vote" for their most desired extensions via
their selection of Dash-Level-Domains (DLDs) in .COM ?
Have you considered how little information is needed to find 32-bit DNS servers for a TLD like .ONLINE ?
Have you considered how the new 128-bit DNS servers can be added to do the above location and to
build around the edges of the 32-bit DNS to add new services to the existing [SLD].ONLINE users and
no central body needs to attempt to regulate or legislate away the truth that is located directly from the
DNS servers, which are easy to find, if one starts with the right neighborhood and works their way in all
directions from there.
The Top 2,048 TLDs can be located and summarized via totally automated systems. No root name servers
are needed. Once a few TLDs are located, they can lead the software to the other ones. The makeup of the
TLD Clusters does not change all that often. In the cases where there are two TLD Clusters providing
reliable and redundant service for a TLD, automatic fail-over mechanisms can be used to detect the failure
of the cluster and the IP addresses can be switched to the backup cluster. Humans can simulate the various
services and server configuration with some simple tools (some shown above). No "whois" servers need to
be queried and no root servers. Like an organism constantly searching for the Top 2,048 TLDs, the
software can work tirelessly behind the scenes, tracking the TLDs. All that is really needed is a list of the
most likely or most desired TLDs. Finding the TLD Clusters then becomes a simple task. From there,
finding the key SLD names, such as IN-ADDR.[TLD] becomes very simple, because those queries can
be sent directly to one of the servers for the TLD Cluster. No root servers are needed. No top-down,
central committee is needed to approve or accredit what is in the DNS. What is in the DNS is what is in
the DNS, and anyone can find it...if they "dig" a little....
2002:[IPv4]:000X:03DB:...IPv8 is closer than you think...
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html