Re: Obsolete it, when you cannot reform it? (Was: Re: new.net (was: Root Server DDoS Attack: What The Media Did Not Tell You))

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb at research.att.com>]

In message <20021202205024.U94626-100000 at voo.doo.net>, Marc Schneiders writes:

>
>Which would have the same result as what you predict for a few hundred
>extra TLDs. The solution to the whole problem is of course to replace
>DNS by something better. I've heard more than a few times in the past,
>that it will be replaced by other functions/schemes/directories. Not
>that I am aware of any that seems to qualify for all the functions so
>far. Still, it would be quite on topic, if I may say so, to discuss
>what we should develop to do a better job. Obsolete it, if you cannot
>reform it?
>
>
I think that a requirements document for that would be entirely in 
order.  I suspect that no one system will be able to fulfill all 
requirements.


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
		http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)