[CS-FSLUG] Decentralized DNS

[David McGlone]

On Wednesday, December 01, 2010 02:28:37 pm Josiah Ritchie wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:13 PM, David McGlone <david at dmcentral.net> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 01, 2010 09:49:59 am Ed Hurst wrote:
> > > On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Peter J. Vasquez Sr. wrote:
> > > > Using a decentralized system has it's dangers, and I think the goal
> > > > the developers of this distributed DNS system is more of an
> > > > awakening. It will be interested to see what comes from this, and
> > > > what changes may take place as a result. I hope I've addressed your
> > > > question, I've done my best to keep the answer short so as not to be
> > > > too confusing. If there's something else you wanted to discuss,
> > > > particularly on the distributed DNS project, I'd be happy to answer
> > > > any questions. (I'm not involved in the project, but have started
> > > > looking at the code).
> > > 
> > > Outstanding answer. You summarized things I already understood and
> > > extended it to areas which had puzzled me.
> > > 
> > > Over the years I've kept track of a recurring theme of geeks seeking to
> > > protect the Net from what they consider abusive controls. It does not
> > > arise from something so simplistic as "corporate-government = evil
> > > versus hackers = good".  Some corporate players seem consistently
> > > benign, and a few truly evil, and most are simply opportunists. Some
> > > governments cozy up with lobbyists, and some simply do what governments
> > > have always done in seeking control. All that to say the issue at hand
> > > is not so much the politics, but the results for you and me. It won't
> > > matter who is doing what if there exists something in the nature of the
> > > Internet which resists certain kinds of controls.
> > > 
> > > It's more the fundamental question of the centralizers over the
> > > de-centralizers. What you describe is a centralized system of passing
> > > traffic, but that it doesn't have to be that way. Authoritative root
> > > server systems for DNS are centralized and trusted, but provide the
> > > choke point centralizers seek. As one who has suffered somewhat at the
> > > hands of centralizers in various ways, I'm always interested in keeping
> > > my eye on the counter efforts. I don't think I suffer too much from
> > > cinema-based fantasies, since I hate TV and movies in general, but I do
> > > admit to some ignorance of how the Net works. My calling and emphasis
> > > has been on the nature and content of information for which I use the
> > > Net, and I simply don't have the resources left to pursue the fine art
> > > of systems administration and networking (see Ephesians 4).
> > > 
> > > I recognize there is good and bad in having an Internet mono-culture.
> > > If everyone used the same OS and applications, it would be like the
> > > Roman roads, built to hasten military movements, but also easily
> > > adapted to gospel spreading. I doubt anyone here doesn't realize
> > > Paul's Roman citizenship was useful, even while Roman government was
> > > hardly benign. It was Rome who eventually executed Paul, essentially
> > > for his preaching. Other apostles went in other directions, using less
> > > centralized systems, but we don't have Scripture accounts of them by
> > > which to compare, but surely it had its advantages in leaving the
> > > Roman Empire to evangelize. The question was not which was better, but
> > > to what one is called. So I use Open Source right now, not because
> > > it's morally superior in my eyes, but fits my calling best. My support
> > > is conditional, but I do support it.
> > > 
> > > I'm trying to extrapolate from the whining entertainment pirates to
> > > those who have a godly reason to bypass the centralized system, even
> > > while taking advantage of its presence. If all we get from this is a
> > > better, continued distribution of Hollywood filth, they can keep it. If
> > > it holds promise for those of us who may need to copy the technology to
> > > avoid the consequences, intended or not, of increased centralized
> > > control, then I want to know how I might make use of it, and what I
> > > need to know to prepare for that.
> > 
> > I don't understand.  I can't think of one godly reason to bypass it.
> > enlightment me.
> 
> In certain countries the Bible is less than a welcome book. If we wanted to
> access the BibleGateway.com in those countries who may use DNS as a means
> of blocking such access, then a decentralized DNS would allow us to still
> access the materials. We could then also change the IP associated with
> that service regularly so that it would be difficult to block access to
> BibleGateway.com without blocking large sections of the Internet. With
> IPv6 a certain amount of anonymity related to each IP would also be
> available making it more difficult to track down the offending IPs owners.
> It would certainly only be a part of the solution, but the distribution of
> media whether smut or the Bible is still the distribution of 0 and 1s so
> the potential exists for the tech to be used for good.

I see. I keep forgetting about other countries. I need to start "thinking 
outside the country" :-)

-- 
Blessings
David M.