[dns-operations] Blockchain Address Transparency with DNS

[Phillip Hallam-Baker]

There are good reasons for using an append only log as the basis for a name
registration. See for example:

Mathematical Mesh 3.0 Part VII: Mesh Callsign Service (ietf.org)
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-hallambaker-mesh-callsign-00.html>

If you start with an authenticated append only log, you get the benefits of
secure by default. The log is the authoritative source of name
registrations. If you require registration of a public key at the same
time, you can make all registry operations transparent and auditable.

But

You can't graft an append only log onto a registry post facto. And
certainly not as a third party effort. Who is to say any given blockchain
is the ground truth?

The chief limitation in the current DNS is that the running costs are
ruinous as the registry is required to support resolution which exposes it
to abuse. 99% of traffic to core DNS is abuse and misconfigured systems.
The root operators, VeriSign etc, are unable to respond to the abuse
except by building out absurd levels of excess capacity. As a consequence,
DNS names must be rented rather than sold.

Finally, any system that builds on any infrastructure related to a
purported crypto-currency is going to be unacceptable to many. I for one am
fed up of being told BitCoin doesn't generate vast amounts of CO2, doesn't
provide the payments infrastructure for ransomware, child abuse etc. I am
fed up of the gaslighting denial of the facts.






On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 4:38 AM Vittorio Bertola via dns-operations <
dns-operations at dns-oarc.net> wrote:

>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola at open-xchange.com>
> To: InterNetX - Marco Schrieck <marco.schrieck at internetx.com>,
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:32:09 +0200 (CEST)
> Subject: Re: [dns-operations] Blockchain Address Transparency with DNS
>
>
> > Il 22/07/2021 21:36 InterNetX - Marco Schrieck <
> marco.schrieck at internetx.com> ha scritto:
> >
> >
> > Hi Eduardo,
> >
> > Maybe you take a look on this. its is something similar:
> >
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mayrhofer-did-dns/
>
> That draft associates a hostname with a URI pointing to a DID document,
> i.e. the identifier for a digital identity, rather than with a blockchain
> address in general. At the ID4me project (www.id4me.org) we are also
> working on a way to store a DID document directly within a DNS record,
> saving the HTTP connection. However, I am not sure whether Eduardo's use
> case is about identities or more general than that.
>
> I would have comments on Eduardo's proposal (e.g. in the case of the TXT
> record I would recommend the use of a specific underscored prefix) but
> possibly this is a discussion for DNSOP, rather than for DNS-OARC.
>
> --
> Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange
> vittorio.bertola at open-xchange.com
> Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Vittorio Bertola via dns-operations <dns-operations at dns-oarc.net>
> To: InterNetX - Marco Schrieck <marco.schrieck at internetx.com>,
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:32:09 +0200 (CEST)
> Subject: Re: [dns-operations] Blockchain Address Transparency with DNS
> _______________________________________________
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20210723/ad44c9c8/attachment.html>