schanzen

5 ms·

1.
by schanzen 2y ago
Presentation given at IETF 118: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/materials/slides-11...
2.
by schanzen 2y ago
Co-author here. If you look into the R5N paper (link in draft), you can find this term. If you assume a routing performance of O(log n) and O(sqrt (n)) number of lookups to find the value, you get O (sqrt (n) * log n) as overall complexity
3.
Webinar: The GNU Name System and the Road to Publishing an RFC(nlnet.nl)
4 points by schanzen 3y ago|1 comments
4.
by schanzen 3y ago
Our recent webinar shows the state of GNS, and addresses some recurring questions regarding governance, how name registration is supposed to work and the RFC.
5.
by schanzen 3y ago
This is correct. I would like to add that the ISE also had us engage with a variety of stakeholders within the IETF (dnsop, for example, as part of discussions on RFC 9476) and also expected some third party reviews. This is probably the ti
6.
by schanzen 3y ago
These are all valid deployment questions, which we tried to address in Appendix A. In a nutshell, we expect that resolvers would ship with a (large) set of default "suffix-to-zone" mappings, that can be overridden by the user to p
7.
by schanzen 3y ago
Indeed that would work. In theory. Especially since we thought of that use case (delegation into DNS) with the GNS2DNS record type. There is a BUT: You need an initial label for ICANN zone to resolve the names. Unless you have a resolver im
8.
by schanzen 3y ago
We are currently working on mirroring some DNS TLDs: https://www.gnunet.org/en/news/2022-11-NGI-Entrust-GNS-TLDs.... I have been a bit preoccupied with the RFC and other stuff recently, but its progressing.
9.
by schanzen 3y ago
Basically that means you have an issue with https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9476.html , not GNS. GNS, in theory, could replace DNS (the technology) and reuse its current root governance model as default. From the poin
10.
by schanzen 3y ago
We use this SU-TLD in our GNS draft which is also already in the editor queue: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schanzen-gns/
11.
The .alt Special-Use Top-Level Domain(rfc-editor.org)
3 points by schanzen 3y ago|2 comments
12.
by schanzen 4y ago
This is really nice information. Thank you! FWIW we have recently acquired funding to demonstrate that GNS can handle large size zones by migrating TLD zones (available through AXFR for now, the number of zones supporting hat is, eh, margin
13.
by schanzen 4y ago
For our transitive use of petnames in name systems see also https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schanzen-gns/ and https://www.gnunet.org/en/gns.html
14.
by schanzen 4y ago
Yes. And it is totally possible that a "common" and default use case with GNS looks just like DNS. The spec just does not mandate the governance. In fact, it mandates implementations to honor user-chosen configurations for petname
15.
by schanzen 4y ago
It is important to distinguish the technical procedure of resolving a name with the namespace governance. You could imagine a system where you manage your DNS root zone locally ("hyperlocal") and there is NO consensus on what it c
16.
by schanzen 4y ago
You can. Either using nsswitch plugins or a local DNS service that resolved the names in GNS. But, browsers are delicate when it comes to TLS certificates, for example. See also https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draf
17.
by schanzen 4y ago
There are a lot of stakeholders involved and a lot of applications relying on DNS may have problems (browsers). So the migration path is long and winded I guess. Other than that, no. GNS itself could also be realised on top of other DHTs, s
18.
by schanzen 4y ago
Theoretically, you could combine a blockchain-based root zone governance (e.g. Handshake) with GNS. This would give you globally unique names and efficient and private delegated names. In general, not a fan of BNS beyond that, through, as u
19.
by schanzen 4y ago
From a technical perspective this is possible, I think. But it would mean one of two things: 1. Your implementation/OSes default configuration is messed up. 2. You accidentally messed up your local configuration yourself. If 4rergdes09
20.
by schanzen 4y ago
Well compelling the TLD owner (in this case .com) through the courts to change the delegation to your zone also works in GNS. (You would not force some kind of "hand over" of the example.com domain. Because that is not how it work
21.
by schanzen 4y ago
No, we chose the petname/SDSI solution to the problem: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns-19.html#n...
22.
by schanzen 4y ago
Yes, and you could apply the DNS governance model to GNS. For example: Let's say GNS gets traction. Users and implementation could provide a list of start zone mappings which are managed by ICANN and use this as a default. Effectively,
23.
by schanzen 4y ago
6) In the spec we clarify: "While DNS is distributed, in practice it relies on centralized, trusted registrars to provide globally unique names. As the awareness of the central role DNS plays on the Internet rises, various institutions
24.
by schanzen 4y ago
Actually, GNS does solve this partially: If there is a squatter for, e.g. example.com, and this is a troll preventing Example Co from claiming their "name", they could just lobby/advertise for this mapping configuration in st
25.
by schanzen 4y ago
This sentence is usually added for specifications which are submitted independently to the Independent Stream Editor, as opposed to drafts which are discussed in a WG at IETF.
26.
by schanzen 4y ago
This is a complex question. In order to use GNS "like" DNS, you need a similar Root Zone governance. See also https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schanzen-gns-19.html#n... and https://www.ie
27.
by schanzen 4y ago
It is also currently in the "final" phases of a RFC publication (Indepdendent Stream, Informational): https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schanzen-gns/
28.
by schanzen 4y ago
It stands for "Living Standards Document": https://www.gnunet.org/en/livingstandards.html
29.
by schanzen 4y ago
We use recutils for the GNUnet and GNU Taler names and numbers registry: https://gana.gnunet.org Using the recsel and recfmt tools that come with it you can autogenerate header/source files of constants from such a format i
30.
by schanzen 5y ago
To be honest: I would prefer our mailing list for discussions (see top post). Our email addresses are also in the draft. A lot of discussions happen via the IETF Datatracker infrastructure and internal email discussions/meetings. We ha

More ›