Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

tools.ietf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 81 posts

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#51

Post by rmc »

wmf wrote: post #48
EricBurnett wrote: post #23

Setting aside the motivations for this draft, the idea of removing the one single DNS 'root' is a reasonable one. It acts as a single point of failure for the DNS system and puts the entire DNS hierarchy under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Commerce. There are already existing alternative roots[1], but no interoperability between them and no standards governing them. Indeed, the IETF is strongly…

If every AIP must have a single unique designation, there must be an organization handing them out. I've got an idea; let's use two-letter ISO country codes...

Countries sometimes disagree about what is or isn't a country, and also on what lands/people are in what country.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#52

Post by wilfra »

kijin wrote: post #14

"Internet autonomy" = we want to have our own intranet so we can cut off the rest of the world from our population without causing technical trouble. "Unilateral action" = we're gonna do this whether you like it or not. But you know what, the Chinese already have the means to do this. Just block anything that doesn't end in ".cn", and block port 53 on all foreign DNS servers. Then what's the point of this internet dr…

If they block all but .cn they are effectively shutting down the internet. Of the top 25 sites in China, 22 use .com - and 21 of those are Chinese companies[1]. Those companies would much rather have their domain in US Jurisdiction than subject to the whims of the PRC.

[1]http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/CN

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#53

Post by mturmon »

gwillen wrote: post #37

I see a lot of people complaining about the quality of English in the draft. This makes me wonder about something: Is it legal to discriminate in hiring based on English skills? It seems like it would necessarily have a disparate impact based on national origin, which I believe is a protected class. But to forbid hiring on the basis of English skills would seem very strange in an English-speaking company, where Engli…

It is certainly ok to require excellent communication skills in hiring certain positions. Probably not for all positions across an enterprise, though.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#55

Post by maerek »

wmf wrote: post #48
EricBurnett wrote: post #23

Setting aside the motivations for this draft, the idea of removing the one single DNS 'root' is a reasonable one. It acts as a single point of failure for the DNS system and puts the entire DNS hierarchy under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Commerce. There are already existing alternative roots[1], but no interoperability between them and no standards governing them. Indeed, the IETF is strongly…

If every AIP must have a single unique designation, there must be an organization handing them out. I've got an idea; let's use two-letter ISO country codes...

At discussion here are the root DNS servers, which are at a higher level in the hierarchy than any of the ccTLD or gTLD domains. We're talking about the (.) level.

e.g. www.google.com.

That trailing dot is never used in a web browser, but it most certainly does exist.

ccTLDs are a great idea, but somewhere around 60% of the top million websites in the world are run off of .com domains; there's no guarantee that a country could block an entire gTLD or ccTLD and successfully limit all questionable content.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#56

Post by mprovost »

cantankerous wrote: post #34
sanxiyn wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it offensive? How is it incoherent?

I can't speak to the offensive end, but it is an RFC draft proposal, and the author seems to be missing a lot of in/definite articles in his writing. It does make parts of it less coherent.

At least they took the time to write it in English. Considering how much effort the inventors and maintainers of the DNS put into supporting non-ASCII languages like Chinese I think that's pretty good, even if they missed a few articles.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#57

Post by mprovost »

batista wrote: post #38
mtgx wrote: post #6

I wonder if this is just because they would like as much control over their population as possible and they want their own Internet, as they would like their own "Twitter", and own "Facebook" and so on, out of a strong sense of nationalism, or because they are worried that US wants more and more control of the Internet, and could be why they are also support getting the Internet under UN's control (among other things…

> I wonder if this is just because they would like as much control over their population as possible and they want their own Internet, as they would like their own "Twitter", and own "Facebook" and so on, out of a strong sense of nationalism, Nationalism, or merely, wanting control over your own country, is also at play, here. Americans think every other country should be OK with them having control over the internet…

Americans also think that ASCII should be good enough for anybody.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#58

Post by wmf »

maerek wrote: post #55
wmf wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If every AIP must have a single unique designation, there must be an organization handing them out. I've got an idea; let's use two-letter ISO country codes...

At discussion here are the root DNS servers, which are at a higher level in the hierarchy than any of the ccTLD or gTLD domains. We're talking about the (.) level. e.g. www.google.com. That trailing dot is never used in a web browser, but it most certainly does exist. ccTLDs are a great idea, but somewhere around 60% of the top million websites in the world are run off of .com domains; there's no guarantee that a cou…

If you can refer to outside "roots" by appending some kind of suffix, it's not really a root.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#59

Post by klodolph »

rmc wrote: post #51
wmf wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If every AIP must have a single unique designation, there must be an organization handing them out. I've got an idea; let's use two-letter ISO country codes...

Countries sometimes disagree about what is or isn't a country, and also on what lands/people are in what country.

Of course, it's something we already know what we disagree about. Whereas using another set of names is an additional thing to disagree about on top of the existing things we already disagree about.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#60

Post by ricardobeat »

EricBurnett wrote: post #23

Setting aside the motivations for this draft, the idea of removing the one single DNS 'root' is a reasonable one. It acts as a single point of failure for the DNS system and puts the entire DNS hierarchy under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Commerce. There are already existing alternative roots[1], but no interoperability between them and no standards governing them. Indeed, the IETF is strongly…

I thought there wasn't one single root, but 13? And aren't root DNS servers already de-centralized geographically and using anycast?

Here is the map of current root servers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Root-current.svg

Post reply on HN