Re: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Information based solutions instead of policy based solutions
- To: "gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Information based solutions instead of policy based solutions
- From: Marc Perkel <marc@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:35:04 -0700
Dave Piscitello wrote:
It's not a new protocol. It's standard DNS used in the same way that DNS
list are used in the spam filtering world. The reason to use DNS instead
of Whois is because whois want designed to be massively queried the way
I do not understand why TXT records in the DNS protocol is the way to
do it and no one has provided a compelling argument why the using the
DNS protocol in a non-standard way is the preferred candidate. If the
information is simply arbitrarily constructed ASCII, you could use
other protocols. Maybe I'm too much of a protocol purist, but if I
have a specific kind of resource I want to the DNS to return, then I
think the correct way to design a protocol is to identify a new query
and record type, not to say, "in this ICANN policy and context, we are
using TXT records constructed in this fashion for this purpose".
That would be trivial I think. Using the open source program rbldnsd it
could run off of very simple test files. Implementation is trivial.
Someone's got to write the DNS server code to populate TXT records in
this specific way.
Is this all custom code? Do you want ISC, Nominum, NSD/Unbound, etc.
to include this in libraries. Or is it your expectation that the DNS
operators will custom code this because ICANN makes it a policy? Is
any interoperability or compliance testing required of the DNS
operator under an ICANN agreement?
I think Joe's question -- does this information exist today and is
there a way to deliver it?
No - it doesn't.