Something better than DNS?

[Pekka Savola <pekkas at netcore.fi>]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006, Keith Moore wrote:
> p.s. rather than adding more and more burdens to DNS, what we really need to 
> be doing is figuring out how to replace it with something more robust and 
> more flexible.  (Yes, you'd have to arrange that DNS queries and queries to 
> the new database would return consistent results; you'd also have to make 
> sure that DNSSEC didn't break, but those are both doable.)
>
> DNS is getting very long in the tooth, and is entirely too inflexible and too 
> fragile.  The very fact that we're having a discussion about whether it makes 
> more sense to add a new RR type or use TXT records with DKIM is a clear 
> indicator that something seriously is wrong with DNS. Adding a new RR type 
> should not require a single line of DNS server or client library code to be 
> recompiled, nor any changes to the configuration of any server not 
> advertising such records.

Keith,

I've seen you say this for many years now, but I'll bite now.
Do you have ideas what a more flexible, less fragile, and in 
general a better mechanism would:

 1) be or look like, or

 2) what requirements we should have for building and deploying it?
    (if such a thing or a close likeness doesn't exist)

I wonder if there are practical alternatives.  A bit more dialogue on 
"what else" instead of "DNS is a bad idea" might help in figuring out 
whether there is anything the IETF could do about it.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf