'MultiBind'?
Date: Thursday April 05 2001, @03:38PM
Topic: Alternate Roots

A posting to the GA list from the self-styled "American Webmasters" announces the existence of a beta version of "MultiBind" - a fork from "Bind" (by far the most popular DNS management program) that it says makes subscribing to multiple alternate roots easy. Full text, and some comments, inside.

Here's the text of the email.

From: "MultiBind (tm) - LION MAIL"
To: ga@dnso.org
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: [ga] MultiBind Testers Wanted

American Webmasters is completing modifications to Bind 9.1.1 in a new version called MultiBind. MultiBind solves the problem of multiple root networks on the internet by allowing the specification of more than one root.cache file.

Cache files are processed in order of sysadmin-specified preference. When looking for a TLD, MultiBind searches each of the RSNs until a match is found.

MultiBind will also allow the sysadmin to specify RSN-TLD preferences so that control is not just at the root server level.

We are looking for testers - anyone who would like the code, please respond here. The beta release will be ready on May 1, 2001

Lion
http://www.nic.lion

The e-mail's source is adns.net, which operates alternate TLDs named .earth, .usa, and .Z .

I think the value of this feature is it will provide comfort to the nervous. It's already possible to point one's DNS service at any of a number of domain name servers that carry the full legacy (Dept. of Commerce/ICANN) root, plus many other domains. To a certain extent, that puts the onus of sorting out conflicting claims on the maintainer of that DNS server, or the person running the root zone on which it relies. BIND is not exactly a consumer product - it's used by name servers only.

Thus, I think the primary virtue of this program will be to give comfort to name server operators and ISPs who might (reasonably?) be afraid that if they picked the wrong service someone might tinker with the resolution of the legacy root and send their customers to the wrong .com. If this product exists, and works as described, it should be possible to instruct a DNS server to always use the legacy root until it comes up empty, then -- and only then -- use the alternates. That has to be more comfortable for a business, even if it also means they take on the task of sorting competing claims among alternate root operators.

[To respond, or start a new comment thread, click the "Send Your Comment" button in the yellow box to the right.]

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
'MultiBind'? | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 6 comments | Search Discussion
Click this button to post a comment to this story
The options below will change how the comments display
Threshold:
Check box to change your default comment view
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Re: 'MultiBind'?
by Jon_Weinberg on Tuesday April 10 2001, @03:29PM (#507)
User #16 Info | www.threecats.net
Paul Vixie, on NANOG, has responded that notwithstanding that the source code for BIND is available under a BSD-style license, so that it can be modified and redistributed, the word "Multibind" may infringe the Internet Software Consortium's trademark in the name "BIND". He continued:
ISC's long-held position is that any proposal involving "multiple root networks" is nothing short of domain piracy and also violates the DNS protocol. . . . [T]he possibly infringing product "MultiBind" from American
Webmasters directly contravenes the IETF IAB's position as laid out in RFC 2826. ISC *strongly* recommends that the comments in RFC 2826 be heeded by the Internet community, and that the extensions described above for the infringing product "MultiBind" *not* be used by anyone connected to the Internet. (footnotes omitted)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: 'MultiBind'?
by hta on Sunday April 15 2001, @10:25AM (#532)
User #2773 Info
Technically, the most profound effect of MultiBind is that it will multiply by the number of alternate roots configured the time required to return an error message when the user types ".con" instead of ".com".
[ Reply to This | Parent ]




This article comes from ICANNWatch
http://www.icannwatch.org/

The URL for this story is:
http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=01/04/05/193834