Discuss mailing list

[Quinn Wood <wood.quinn.s AT gmail.com>]

No. This isn't even my vote, it's an objection.

 * This is a misleading proposal, as no peering is taking place. You
want to perform one-way (OpenNIC to Namecoin) access. As I've already
mentioned this- at best- isn't useful in any way I find obvious.

 * There's no charter. I don't know that one is possible, because
nobody here is in control of the top level zone. What are you going to
do, refuse to let people resolve using your DNS server if they
register a domain you don't like or use their domain to crack/spam?
Tough, their domain is still there and kicking, all with the glorious
implicit support of OpenNIC that the anti-cracking/spaming policy was
intended to prevent.

 * There's no (proof of) an information, registration, and
administration service (web-based or otherwise.) This is possible with
Namecoin, just as you can proxy between typical DNS clients and
namecoind.

 * There is no (proof of) a service we as a community can rely on to
be stable and secure.

* There is no (proof of) an admin we as a community can depend on, get
a hold of, or boot in the ass when things are broken.

You want to provide a service, do it on your own time- just like
DNSCrypt and operator-specific bridges/peerings.

Damnit people. In the past [less than] six months we've:
1.) watched .ing disappear
2.) barely dragged .pirate onto it's feet
3.) effectively watched .oz disappear
4.) had  a newcomer (who, while he seems to know his stuff, we don't
even know yet) take over .oz
5.) went through this big process of moving T1 stuff to an LDAP backup
(and associated hicups along the way) to decentralize normal zones,
while you are suggesting we allow you to operate a centralized
pseudo-normal zone centralizing a decentralized non-normal zone. <-
dafuq, rewrote that several times and didn't come up with anything
better.

Again, hell na'.