Number of "full nodes" vs Bitcoin vs DNS

[somename]

It seems there's 200+ active at the moment, with 900 "known"
https://bitinfocharts.com/namecoin/ (<=nice page)

When we consider the number of full nodes, is it more suitable to compare it with the number of DNS (or other similar) servers one might use when browsing the Web, or Bitcoin full nodes?

It seems that the state of the Namecoin network should be looked at differently from Bitcoin, because services such as name resolution are important in different way than Bitcoin.

[domob]

This is of course somewhat a philosophical question, but to me the number should definitely be compared to Bitcoin nodes. The nodes of the network are not DNS servers, those are separate services set up by some people. Thus it makes no sense to compare Namecoin P2P nodes with DNS servers. (This picture may change slightly in the future if we introduce UNO commitments and a P2P protocol for trustless light client name queries, but at the moment it is like that.)

[somename]

This is of course somewhat a philosophical question, but to me the number should definitely be compared to Bitcoin nodes. The nodes of the network are not DNS servers, those are separate services set up by some people. Thus it makes no sense to compare Namecoin P2P nodes with DNS servers. (This picture may change slightly in the future if we introduce UNO commitments and a P2P protocol for trustless light client name queries, but at the moment it is like that.)

Yes, I agree.
(I was thinking about the time (hopefully soon) when we'll have service users who don't run a local instance of Namecoin.)