Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
What do we need for namecoin to take off (or maybe emercoin) 
Author Message

Posts: 4
os: linux
Reply with quote
 What do we need for namecoin to take off (or maybe emercoin)
Expecting, that general audience will suddenly install namecoin dns server to resolve .bit domains, they don't care is proved wrong and naive. After thinking a while, I figured out, that there is only one way for alternative DNS to become massively adopted. It must be supported by most ISPs. Usually, as far as I know they use BIND for their DNS servers. Easiest way to make them resolve .bit domain is to make top linux distros BIND resolve it off-the-shelf, by default, with default settings. So the shortest path would be to convince those, who responsible for major disto contents to ship everything necessary by default.

Updated: corrected mistake "off-the-box" => "off-the-shelf". Sorry for my English.

_________________
NameID: id/bagazaga


Last edited by bagazaga on Sat Dec 31, 2016 8:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Fri Dec 30, 2016 2:40 pm
Profile

Posts: 1927
os: linux
Reply with quote
Post Re: What do we need for namecoin to take off (or maybe emerc
bagazaga wrote:
Expecting, that general audience will suddenly install namecoin dns server to resolve .bit domains, they don't care is proved wrong and naive. After thinking a while, I figured out, that there is only one way for alternative DNS to become massively adopted. It must be supported by most ISPs. Usually, as far as I know they use BIND for their DNS servers. Easiest way to make them resolve .bit domain is to make top linux distros BIND resolve it off-the-box, by default, with default settings. So the shortest path would be to convince those, who responsible for major disto contents to ship everything necessary by default.


If major OS's supported Namecoin by default (which would be awesome), what exactly would be the point of making ISP's trusted parties?

Anyway, it's kind of pointless trying to convince OS maintainers to ship Namecoin support by default when it's a major pain in the rear to install explicitly [1]. I've never heard of a GNU/Linux distro that ships software pre-installed without packaging it first.

[1] There's ongoing work happening in this area.

_________________
Jeremy Rand, Lead Namecoin Application Engineer
NameID: id/jeremy
DyName: Dynamic DNS update client for .bit domains.

Donations: BTC 1EcUWRa9H6ZuWPkF3BDj6k4k1vCgv41ab8 ; NMC NFqbaS7ReiQ9MBmsowwcDSmp4iDznjmEh5


Sat Dec 31, 2016 3:41 am
Profile

Posts: 4
os: linux
Reply with quote
Post Re: What do we need for namecoin to take off (or emercoin)
biolizard89 wrote:
what exactly would be the point of making ISP's trusted parties?


I'm not talking about making them trusted parties(yet they are already, in fact). I'm talking about massive adoption. The only way for namecoin to become default DNS is to make it available by default with linux distros, without any efforts. ISP's can make namecoin available to masses if it ever become available by default with linux distros, simply by not removing corresponding packages. With further namecoin adoption it will eventually become recognized part of an internet and get into all major OS's default distros.

_________________
NameID: id/bagazaga


Last edited by bagazaga on Sat Dec 31, 2016 2:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sat Dec 31, 2016 1:59 pm
Profile

Posts: 4
os: linux
Reply with quote
Post Re: What do we need for namecoin to take off (or maybe emerc
biolizard89 wrote:
it's a major pain in the rear to install explicitly [1]

[1] There's ongoing work happening in this area.


I know, yet it's a showstopper for Namecoin itergration into linux distros. This work is rather very important for Namecoin's future.

_________________
NameID: id/bagazaga


Sat Dec 31, 2016 2:06 pm
Profile

Posts: 1927
os: linux
Reply with quote
Post Re: What do we need for namecoin to take off (or maybe emerc
bagazaga wrote:
biolizard89 wrote:
what exactly would be the point of making ISP's trusted parties?


I'm not talking about making them trusted parties(yet they are already, in fact). I'm talking about massive adoption. The only way for namecoin to become default DNS is to make it available by default with linux distros, without any efforts. ISP's can make namecoin available to masses if it ever become available by default with linux distros, simply by not removing corresponding packages. With further namecoin adoption it will eventually become recognized part of an internet and get into all major OS's default distros.


Please define what you mean by "trusted parties". Also please define what you mean by "ISP's can make Namecoin available to masses". I strongly suspect that at least one of your definitions does not match the commonly accepted definition.

bagazaga wrote:
biolizard89 wrote:
it's a major pain in the rear to install explicitly [1]

[1] There's ongoing work happening in this area.


I know, yet it's a showstopper for Namecoin itergration into linux distros. This work is rather very important for Namecoin's future.


What exactly are you saying that you know?

I'd like to point out a few things.

1. It's completely obvious, uncontroversial, and frankly uninteresting to point out that the fact that Namecoin is a pain in the rear to install is an important thing to fix for Namecoin's future.
2. The actual work that fixes this is coding, funding, and outreach.
3. Happily, the above actually is happening. Specifically:
3a. Hugo and I have been coding stuff.
3b. That coding has been funded by donations to NMDF and the Namecoin Bountysource account. We are actively seeking additional funding.
3c. I have been doing outreach to an OS vendor, and they are very interested in the work that Hugo and I are doing.
4. None of the above work has anything to do with trusting third parties. I won't disclose here the OS vendor that I've been talking to (I don't think it's at all relevant to this conversation), but suffice to say that they would not have any interest in bricking their users' safety. Nor would I.
5. None of the above is served by complaining about Namecoin being a pain in the rear to install as though you think we are unaware that it's very important. Literally everyone who has ever tried to use Namecoin, let alone who develops it, is pretty clearly aware of this.
6. Rather than asking questions about any of the above, you decided to introduce yourself to this community by stating the obvious, combined with stating things that you would have figured out very quickly are harmful ideas had you actually read any of this forum's history (or, for that matter, had you read the Namecoin subreddit's history, or even watched my 10-minute lightning talk that's linked to on the front page of the Namecoin website). Please be advised that this is not a particularly effective way to make a good first impression on any free software community. We're a pretty laid-back community, but no free software community really enjoys being told what to do by someone who clearly hasn't done the minimal research to figure out that this topic comes up regularly, nor figured out what the response invariably is. (Although I admit that the idea that we should first get OS's to support Namecoin, and then toss that out the window by adding 3rd party trust once it's already installed by default, is a new variant on this. Congrats.)
7. As far as I'm aware, you haven't contributed any funding, and you definitely don't have the technical background to be doing coding or outreach on this. This suggests a form of entitlement mentality. (Although even people who do contribute funding are not exempt from the expectation that they learn first and post recommendations afterward.)
8. It's unclear to me why you brought up Emercoin. Care to explain what that was about? Also please be aware that while Namecoin actively coordinates with MoneroDNS (due to a demonstrated interest by MoneroDNS in said coordination, and a demonstrated level of competence), that is unfortunately not the case for Emercoin. You can be forgiven for being unaware of our opinion of Emercoin, since it doesn't come up very often (it does show up on IRC every now and then).
9. The negative initial impression you're giving would have been considerably helped by simply phrasing your inquiry in the form of a question.

Cheers.

_________________
Jeremy Rand, Lead Namecoin Application Engineer
NameID: id/jeremy
DyName: Dynamic DNS update client for .bit domains.

Donations: BTC 1EcUWRa9H6ZuWPkF3BDj6k4k1vCgv41ab8 ; NMC NFqbaS7ReiQ9MBmsowwcDSmp4iDznjmEh5


Sat Dec 31, 2016 3:22 pm
Profile

Posts: 4
os: linux
Reply with quote
Post Re: What do we need for namecoin to take off
biolizard89 wrote:
Please define what you mean by "trusted parties".


If internet users use provider's DNS - they actually trust providers to resolve domain names. I think, that lets me consider them as trusted party.

biolizard89 wrote:
Also please define what you mean by "ISP's can make Namecoin available to masses". I strongly suspect that at least one of your definitions does not match the commonly accepted definition.


Quite few internet users know the difference between IP addresses and domain names. Quite few of them are able to install and configure namecoin on their own. If they accidentally encounter .bit address on the web, they would not be able to reach it, because they don't care how internet works, and should not care. Everything should work off-the-shelf. Everything, that doesn't work like that - is not available to masses. ISPs make conventional domains reachable for everyone.

biolizard89 wrote:
they would not have any interest in bricking their users' safety. Nor would I.


I didn't know, that it could brick users' safety. Where can I find out more about that?

biolizard89 wrote:
5. None of the above is served by complaining about Namecoin being a pain in the rear to install as though you think we are unaware that it's very important. Literally everyone who has ever tried to use Namecoin, let alone who develops it, is pretty clearly aware of this.
6. Rather than asking questions about any of the above, you decided to introduce yourself to this community by stating the obvious, combined with stating things that you would have figured out very quickly are harmful ideas had you actually read any of this forum's history (or, for that matter, had you read the Namecoin subreddit's history, or even watched my 10-minute lightning talk that's linked to on the front page of the Namecoin website). Please be advised that this is not a particularly effective way to make a good first impression on any free software community. We're a pretty laid-back community, but no free software community really enjoys being told what to do by someone who clearly hasn't done the minimal research to figure out that this topic comes up regularly, nor figured out what the response invariably is. (Although I admit that the idea that we should first get OS's to support Namecoin, and then toss that out the window by adding 3rd party trust once it's already installed by default, is a new variant on this. Congrats.)
7. As far as I'm aware, you haven't contributed any funding, and you definitely don't have the technical background to be doing coding or outreach on this. This suggests a form of entitlement mentality. (Although even people who do contribute funding are not exempt from the expectation that they learn first and post recommendations afterward.)
8. It's unclear to me why you brought up Emercoin. Care to explain what that was about? Also please be aware that while Namecoin actively coordinates with MoneroDNS (due to a demonstrated interest by MoneroDNS in said coordination, and a demonstrated level of competence), that is unfortunately not the case for Emercoin. You can be forgiven for being unaware of our opinion of Emercoin, since it doesn't come up very often (it does show up on IRC every now and then).
9. The negative initial impression you're giving would have been considerably helped by simply phrasing your inquiry in the form of a question.


I had no intention to complain or be rude. I'm sorry if it looks like that. I just had an idea, that I wanted to share. Can we start over? Just want to know, where am I wrong.

_________________
NameID: id/bagazaga


Sat Dec 31, 2016 9:01 pm
Profile

Posts: 1927
os: linux
Reply with quote
Post Re: What do we need for namecoin to take off (or maybe emerc
(Sorry for delayed reply, it's been a busy month.)

The issue here is that Namecoin doesn't use CA's for things like TLS [1]; it uses TLS certs specified in the domain name data. (Similar to DNSSEC in DNS.) With DNS, the DNSSEC trust root is the ICANN root key, so your ISP can't provide fraudulent data. However, with Namecoin, the DNSSEC trust root is defined by the software that converts Namecoin into DNS. That works perfectly fine if that software is running on your own machine (in fact, this eliminates the ICANN root key as a trusted party). But if that software is running on your ISP, that means your ISP can feed you fraudulent data that lets them do MITM attacks on TLS.

Hence my comment that trusting ISP's to run Namecoin would brick users' safety.

[1] Technically Namecoin could be used with EV TLS certs issued by CA's, but that's not a very common use case.

_________________
Jeremy Rand, Lead Namecoin Application Engineer
NameID: id/jeremy
DyName: Dynamic DNS update client for .bit domains.

Donations: BTC 1EcUWRa9H6ZuWPkF3BDj6k4k1vCgv41ab8 ; NMC NFqbaS7ReiQ9MBmsowwcDSmp4iDznjmEh5


Sat Jan 14, 2017 11:06 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 7 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.