Discuss mailing list

[Alejandro Bonet <albogoal AT gmail.com>]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-7moc6I9Jg


2014/1/18, Alejandro Bonet <albogoal AT gmail.com>:
> Alex:
>
> It will be very pleasant to me to debate with you, because you respect
> different ideas.
>
> Well, the first day i setup my first T2 server, i asked in the chat if
> i could run some tests on others servers and someone (i dont remember
> who) answer me... "What kind of tests?"
>
> I tell him "about one dig query each hour", and he says me "This is
> perfectly legal".
>
> I run these tests during a month (more or less) and then switch off
> these tests. Since three months (more or less) i didn't run any test.
> But, no matter this, i dont understand what is the problem with such
> kind of tests, please explain me it if you want.
>
> By other side, if you run the official Jeff Taylor T2 test on any of
> my servers, you will see they pass it perfectly. Included of course
> NXDOMAIN.
>
> But, from my point of view, to answer NXDOMAIN is not "completely
> fair" if you are asked about registro.ibu: It seems you are "hijacking
> it" or as if "you dont know it exists" which is not true (both)...
>
> Please, Alex, understand this is a complex problem about
> "pseudo-ownership" or "fair play"...
> There are no easy answers to some questions: This is public DNS!!
>
> I dont think anybody has the ownership of any word. But these words
> permits us to reach machines on internet. And there are many forms for
> naming machines: some better and some worse... Intention and content
> is only one of the keys, but there are some other i cant visualize or
> describe...
>
> This is public DNS, again!!!
>
> In my humble opinion, if some person or group say publicly "Hey guys,
> i will manage .xyz tld and the authoritative servers are 1.2.3.4 and
> 5.6.7.8", any open comunity like opennic must take in consideration at
> least four BASIC AND CLEAR RULES:
>
> 1.- It does not conflict with other group or person claiming about the same
> tld.
> 2.- It is not a "universal concept" which can generate conflicts on future.
> 3.- They run stable and public authoritative dns servers for that tld.
> 4.- They run a stable and public registry web, with a set of "reasonable
> rules".
>
> (Whatever you could understand by "reasonable rules"...)
>
> The rest is, of course, decission of the rest of dns servers
> operators: They could say "I dont know anything about .xyz", or they
> can say ".xyz dns is at 1.2.3.4 ip address" when they receive a query
> about .xyz
>
> I prefer the second option and i think it is more fair than the first.
> I dont know what is thinking or doing the host querying my server, but
> i suposse that this host asking about .xyz prefer to receive any
> reasonable answer than NXDOMAIN.
>
> Most times, the person asking about foo-bar.xyz is the "owner" of that
> domain, or a friend of the "owner", or he heard about that domain and
> he want to visit it. As we are public dns servers, we must to try to
> resolve any query as better as we can.
>
> Is this an "universal rule i can strecht until infinite and i can
> response allways to any query, perhaps sending the client to my blog
> if he/she asking me for some domain i dont know" ?
>
> Of course it isn't: This is what here we named as "hijacking the user".
>
> If you answer me NXDOMAIN i understand "you dont know anything about that".
> And this is a very important answer that MUST EXIST, but it means what
> it means and it say what it say.
>
> But im sure you understand the difference.
>
> ...
>
> We decided democratically at the .ibu domain to resolve conflicts with
> unanimity of very few persons, not for "control or hijack the .ibu
> names", else for simplicity.
>
> But as i can see i didnt make a good work to explain it.
>
> We dont know where exactly is the frontier between "fair" and "unfair"
> usage of the names.
>
> Personally i have serious doubts about if that frontier exists or it is
> clear.
>
> It is very complex, subjective and there is not easy answers. But we
> understand there are "clearly fair usages" and "potentially
> conflictive usages", and judges must notice users if this second
> situation happens, and only if it happens.
>
> This "notice" serve to one objective: Appeal to user responsability in
> the use of this "potentially conflictive domain name".
>
> We dont understand freedom without responsability. These are "two
> sides of the same coin".
> (I dont know how this is said in english, it is a "spanish phrase
> translation"...)
>
> But think if we need to call for a vote for each domain, to each
> member, if there are hundreds or thousands members or domains...
>
> Democracy was not propossed and accepted by all of us to paralyze activity.
>
> But, of course: If there is a very interesting case judges cant
> manage, the users must say whatever they think about it, and any
> decission must be democratic.
>
> As "citizen" i want to participate in collective decissions affecting
> me, but i dont want to be asked thousand times each day...
>
> There must be more automated mechanisms to avoid abuses or conflicts
> in registering domains...
>
> About peering: Yes, we think this is the natural way to collaborate and
> flow.
>
> Decentralized, automatizable, neutral, balanced, equalitary, free,
> independent, easy to coordinate...
>
> I only can see good things on it...
>
> And this is exactly we are propossing opennic and each of its members:
> Collaborate as P2P.
>
> Well... I think i say too much and im boring you...
>
> We have fair intention.
> And we are spaniards.
>
> These two things are not mutually incompatible as everybody can
> understand: There is good people all around the world. Allways and
> forever.
>
> Our intention is only to create new forms to understand the internet,
> and new names people can use to connect to it and between them. We are
> not forcing anybody to do nothing.
>
> We dont want to catch and jail all of anything... We are only making a
> proposal of three letters dont conflict (as far as we know) with
> nothing at all, but useful to get another way to comunicate and
> collaborate between us, no matter where we are.
>
> Alejandro Bonet
> albogoal AT gmail.com
>
> PD: You don't imagine the effort i need to do to express all of this
> in english, which is not my natural language...
>
> Thanks, best wishes and good food.
>
>
> 2014/1/18, Quinn Wood <wood.quinn.s AT gmail.com>:
>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Alex Hanselka <alex AT opennicproject.org>
>> wrote:
>>> In closing, please at least try to keep this civil.  It isn't
>>> constructive or helpful for us to just exchange insults.
>>>
>> You smell bad21.
>>
>