poll Will Blockchains replace DNS?

[Internet.Domains]

Will new technologies, such as blockchains, replace the current Domain Name System (DNS)?

There is a current project called "Handshake" (HNS) that is proposing to use it's blockchain to replace the current root servers and root zone files. This system would completely bypass current registries, such as Verisign, and completely bypass ICANN. The idea is to create a decentralized authority bypassing ICANN's centralized and abusive powers.

The proposal goes on to say that domains will be auctioned and effectively anyone can end up running their own decentralized registry via blockchain.

Also of interest is that within the protocol the dots, such as "." will not be needed. As HNS described, someone could bid for "BruceLee" and the browser would recognize this by entering "BruceLee/".

This proposal seems to be getting some momentum with some big names in the technology and VC sphere being early adopters.

More from those proposing "Handshake."

"How do Handshake domains work?


Handshake domains work just like the centralized ICANN domain system, with a few key exceptions. In the world of domains, stuff like “com” “net” and “org” are referred to as Generic Top Level Domains or TLDs. In addition to those ones, there are new TLDs like .pizza or .business, and Country Code TLDs like .io (Indian Ocean) or .ly (Libya). ICANN decides, through a complicated auction and voting process, what top level domains will be approved, and then individual domain registrars who own those TLDs get to sell access to the subdomains on top of them.

On Handshake, *anyone* can register a new TLD, without having to ask for anyone elses permission! So in the beginning on Handshake there is likely to be a rush to register TLDs that will be in demand for people who want to put subdomains on top of them. For example, if you registered “lee” on Handshake, then say Bruce Lee could come and buy bruce.lee from you! So that will probably be where most people direct their attention initially.

However, because anyone can register a tld, another option is to simply USE tlds as your domain. So for example, bruce lee can just register “brucelee” and use it, sans any subdomains. This is pretty awesome, but its also a new pattern for users, and they will have to get used to it. Browsers will also have to choose to adopt allowing bare TLDs instead of assuming they are search terms (currently if you type brucelee into a browser, it won’t do a DNS lookup but will just google brucelee for you). That said, if you enter "brucelee/" your browser will correctly recognize that as a domain. We believe that browsers will offer optional support for this pretty quickly (Brave is already [evaluating](https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1036389193864208384)), and perhaps some will make it the default soon, but in the beginning domains that follow the “thing.domain” pattern will be most in demand because they will simply “work” with existing browsers, as long as users point their DNS at a handshake-supporting server, or if the large DNS servers begin to support Handshake domains."

Handshake white paper:
https://namebase.io/handshake-whitepaper/

 

[Rob Monster]

First things first. From a technical perspective, DNS is a tough act to follow. It has served the Internet very well for more than 3 decades and will easily pivot as needed to allow even more IP addresses and ever more domains. So far so good.

However, in the wake of rising and arbitrary censorship, it is clear that the domain model is at risk of being abandoned to lack of effective governance. For now ICANN is holding the line but registries and registrars are looking really weak these days.

In response, Blockchain has been touted as the panacea. First we had NameCoin, which was Dead on Arrival, and is not going to amount to anything, largely because of implausibly long resolution times that cannot possibly compete with DNS.

As for Handshake, they are off to a productive start but execution will be a huge challenge. Here is the guy leading this effort:

My personal view is that we'll need a stop-gap for overcoming arbitrary censorship, including self-censorship. Here is an overview of Epik's approach. It is called Unstoppable Domains:

https://gab.com/epik/posts/44196461

You might already know about since it is an important topic and I think you already are on Gab.

 

[NYJimbo]

Still waiting for ipv6 to replace ipv4.....

 

[Rob Monster]

The biggest challenges that DNS face right now are human policy issues related to censorship. Innovations for security like DNSSEC, SPF, DMARC have all been adequately addressed through the framework.

Blockchain DNS is ostensibly coming along because of a trust gap. So now we'll have a period where decentralized non-trust (Blockchain) competes with centralized-trust (ICANN, IANA, etc.).

My personal bet is that DNS will continue. The engine works. However, it needs air-bags and safety belts to prevent casualties now that there are crazy drivers on the road. Enough said.

 

[Rob Monster]

Still waiting for ipv6 to replace ipv4.....

Well, the IoT Smart City vision is very much counting on IPv6. As such, you can bet that when 5G shows up in your neighborhood, IPv6 will be right there with it.

The emerging doomsday scenario for Netizens is that it lines up with social credit and facial recognition. And indeed that is already live in China. More here if anyone not familiar:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09...el-citizen-in-a-digital-dictatorship/10200278

Decentralized Blockchain DNS is certainly a worthy project. However, the fundamental question is who decides what is allowed and not allowed on the Internet. Even Tor networks are full of bias.

In case you censorship is a small issue, I can assure anyone here that it is not. The Southern Poverty Law Center added me to their Hatewatch last week. You can see that here:

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/01/11/problem-epik-proportions

As you can see, the very reasonable act of defending lawful free speech is being characterized as an act of hate. It is simply civil liberty.

When it comes to solving the problem of who decides what is on the public Internet, Blockchain is no panacea. I wish them well, but until there is incontrovertible evidence of benevolent intent, I am a skeptic.

So to sum up, some possible emerging choices for the internet are:

1. Global control grid where a central monolith determines who connects and what they can do. (e.g. China model gone global)

2. Blockchain Decentralized Internet with unknown governance implications. (e.g. Handshake)

3. Continuation of the existing Public DNS supplemented by private wide area networks with private governance.

In case it is not obvious, for now, I am betting on option #3.

 

[Keith]

A blockchain decentralized internet could bring great opportunity to early domain investors.

Handshake isn’t the internet though. They are one company of many companies attempting to utilize blockchain tech. In the online world they are a drop of water in the ocean.

There is zero chance they can undo what’s taken decades to establish. Not to mention changing the minds of billions of people and the trillions of dollars poured into the ecosystem. The millions handshake might raise to operate in totality is less than some .com CEOs get as yearly bonuses.

 

[Rob Monster]

I'm underwhelmed with you not addressing actual points brought up here and the other thread, instead going on with conspiracy speak. I read what you said about the Christian guy breaking the law and catching the arrow. You thought it was some government PSYOP. I mean really. Also, you use these threads as promotion for your products.

To "JB":

First of all, you should be happy about my efforts to support Unstoppable domains as it will sustain .COM domains for a long time to come as more individuals can pay retail to own them. I am encouraging our retail clients to buy Forever .COM and they are doing it.

If you do choose to offensively engage me on a thread, you can be assured that I reserve the right to respond. Why? Because you are not actually my audience. You just drive up page views and turn threads into trending threads. You see how that works?

To All:

Domains and DNS are under siege. Domains are free speech. Those who don't want free speech aim to centralize everything so that the takedown process is efficient with no opportunity for repeal or public rebuttal. Decentralization of domains is a natural immune response to tyranny. Fact.

For anyone under the illusion that the Southern Poverty Law Center is a credible organization, you can be assured that it is not, and has not been for some time. They are fully onboard with censorship and doing away with constitutional rights. Prager U did a good job explaining it in this 5 minute video.

Too many people have sampled freedom on the Internet. There is no going back. Either it remains free, or the Netizens will invent around it. As CEO of an ICANN-accredited registrar, I am betting on the continuation of the existing namespace model and am actively reinforcing it as much as I can.

 

[BaileyUK]

Well I'm going to say you are attempting to reinvent the wheel, and a very young wheel.

give it another 30 to 40 years and you'll not only have something in maturity that could seek redress but with the ability to make seamless amendments..The DNS is no where near enough to maturity to think its up for playing around with - blimey look how long https took us

 

[Internet.Domains]

what benefits will the domain investor get if the HNS system is implemented?

If HNS is implemented there will be an auction. More specifically they would implement a blind second-price auction, also known as a Vickrey Auction.

The largest benefit would be complete ownership of the domain. The domain owner would be the registry, no renewals and ToS.

 

[Ategy]

I think what most people are overlooking are both the commercial viability, trust, as well as usability.

I think the biggest hindrance with Crypto is that a wall in terms of number of people would would ever bother setting up a virtual wallet. Be it for technical or trust reasons. I say trust because there certainly are a large number of non-tech people who actually do trust their bank more than their ability to keep their passwords (from hackers and much more importantly, from their own recklessness/stupidity/magnets/etc).

While the current system does rely on registrars, registries and ICANN and is therefore subject to their "rules" / "censorship" .. their control also does hold extreme abuse in check. If you look around this forum you'll find discussions where I am excessively pro-free-speech. But at the same time you'll also see that I am very much in favour of there actually being some semblance of limits, particularly when it comes to child pornography, rape and hate-speech. I completely do understand that there is a problem when it comes to interpretation .. but the lines are NOT as blurry as people on BOTH sides would have you believe. Most jurisdictions do have relatively clear laws in place establishing what is or isn't allowed. It most definitely is NOT a perfect or even ideal solution .. but it is better than the extremist views on both sides.

Another issue is usability .. domains are not about what you type into the browser address bar .. they are also about links .. the dual levels of ____.___ (SLD.TLD) are actually very effective at helping content creation tools (such as the very simple reply box in this forum) automatically detect an active link/email. Every now and then there is a wave of support for top tier only domains (dotless) .. but implementation for content creation as well as email would be a colossal nightmare.

Another MASSIVE point against is just the simple economic might behind the current system. If businesses will not be able to secure their actual trademarks then there will never be enough momentum for any alternate system to get anything close to the critical mass needed to really take off.

Combine the various points I've mentioned and it will be virtually impossible for any such system to ever get any significant traction .. and almost definitely not enough to actually replace the current system.

 

[BaileyUK]

I would've thought, just like a lot of accepted structures, the DNS is not about to be re-invented, purely amended and added to. We can be as critical as we wish (with hindsight) but the bottom-line is that it has fulfilled all major structural requirements. Sure, if it was a new structure with todays awareness It would be a whole new ball game. Reinventing the 'wheel' is feasible - try selling it

 

[JB Lions]

I guess we can't count on you for prison ministry for anytime soon. That's really too bad because there are a lot of confused and angry people that need to channel their energy more productively.

I am doing my part. For example:

Of course when it comes to SPLC, no good deed goes unpunished. They lifted one quote out of a 2 hour impromptu livestream and built a narrative around it.

You're doing your part by doing streams with a couple of (I guess) racists?

You notice how they have you up there, but remain hidden themselves?

Are you being used to help legitimize that crap? Do you know this, don't care because it's business? What exactly? This stuff isn't anything to be proud of but at your current hangout, it's like a badge of honor it looks like.

And no, domains aren't going anywhere. These type of threads are always popping up.

 

[Rob Monster]

For most people, Free Speech is worth protecting. I fully grasp that you do not agree and that is your prerogative as you have made abundantly clear from your perpetual rightspeak here at NamePros. Needless to say, I am underwhelmed by it as I am similarly underwhelmed by your cowardly pseudonym.

 

[Internet.Domains]

I'm underwhelmed with you not addressing actual points brought up here and the other thread, instead going on with conspiracy speak. I read what you said about the Christian guy breaking the law and catching the arrow. You thought it was some government PSYOP. I mean really. Also, you use these threads as promotion for your products.

Please keep posts on topic. Personal attacks won't be tolerated in my thread. If you can't keep emotions under control go kick a wall, not those willing to speak. Thank you.

 

[Keith]

I wonder how “name” without a (.) would stand up to name.com? I’d say it’s no contest. At the end of the day we’re dealing with the internet and companies need to be found.

 

[Internet.Domains]

Handshake isn’t the internet though. They are one company of many companies attempting to utilize blockchain tech. In the online world they are a drop of water in the ocean.

There is zero chance they can undo what’s taken decades to establish. Not to mention changing the minds of billions of people and the trillions of dollars poured into the ecosystem. The millions handshake might raise to operate in totality is less than some .com CEOs get as yearly bonuses.

I understand it's a long stretch, but it is not reinventing the wheel. HNS would use some familiar architecture to implement their protocol. Browsers would have to accept the protocol and ultimately the public.

Of course when DNS became mainstream we still didn't have, or know what @ or # is. Now you can't find a millennial who doesn't know what @ or # is.

Name.com
@Name
#NAME
Name/

Maybe Name/ will not be that far fetched.

 

[BaileyUK]

We only get outside the bed the way our politics drive us. Sorry i took it off topic.

There will be change, as always - some are just too early to the start gate imho

 

[~ The 34 Year Buzz!!]

Consumers would obviously need to be aware, but potentially we could see:

"Name/" vs. "Name.com"

"Name/" would be completely owned and controlled by the owner with a private key. "Name.com" is leased with pages of ToS.

A blockchain decentralized internet could bring great opportunity to early domain investors.

First, the new system needs to be effortlessly accepted by all (most) major browsers, or the alts will remain mostly unused, similar to Namecoin needing a browser plugin for .bit domains.

Second? Stay tuned...

 

[Paul]

First things first. From a technical perspective, DNS is a tough act to follow. It has served the Internet very well for more than 3 decades and will easily pivot as needed to allow even more IP addresses and ever more domains. So far so good.

However, in the wake of rising and arbitrary censorship, it is clear that the domain model is at risk of being abandoned to lack of effective governance. For now ICANN is holding the line but registries and registrars are looking really weak these days.

In response, Blockchain has been touted as the panacea. First we had NameCoin, which was Dead on Arrival, and is not going to amount to anything, largely because of implausibly long resolution times that cannot possibly compete with DNS.

This is fairly accurate. While there are various motivations to replace DNS, for the majority of the Western world, DNS is sufficient and works well enough. There are certainly people with higher-than-average awareness of privacy and political issues, and the trend right now tends toward decentralization, but I don't think there's quite enough momentum (yet) to result in a fullscale DNS replacement. That's not to say we shouldn't keep trying, but, as Rob has pointed out, the most notable attempts (e.g., NameCoin) have been broken from day one.

There are solid technologies that can improve privacy in the interim, though they don't really address the decentralization issue. Personally, I'm a fan of DNSCrypt and DNS-over-HTTPS, both of which have relatively widespread support. I haven't looked into @Rob Monster's Unstoppable Domains yet, but I certainly encourage such efforts.

I currently use a Pi-hole at home, modified to support OpenNIC.

 

[Rick Ace]

Based on how the internet and technology progresses, it's not an issue of if DNS will be replaced, but a matter of when. And that when can take a very long time.

 

[Bernard Wright]

This is the kind of topic that novices like me really get a buzz off of reading. I'm learning a lot here on NP.

I think this is an important topic and I just want to keep this thread in the back of our minds. Just a quick post and a soft bump for that purpose.

 

[Internet.Domains]

First things first. From a technical perspective, DNS is a tough act to follow. It has served the Internet very well for more than 3 decades and will easily pivot as needed to allow even more IP addresses and ever more domains. So far so good.

However, in the wake of rising and arbitrary censorship, it is clear that the domain model is at risk of being abandoned to lack of effective governance. For now ICANN is holding the line but registries and registrars are looking really weak these days.

In response, Blockchain has been touted as the panacea. First we had NameCoin, which was Dead on Arrival, and is not going to amount to anything, largely because of implausibly long resolution times that cannot possibly compete with DNS.

As for Handshake, they are off to a productive start but execution will be a huge challenge. Here is the guy leading this effort:

My personal view is that we'll need a stop-gap for overcoming arbitrary censorship, including self-censorship. Here is an overview of Epik's approach. It is called Unstoppable Domains:

https://gab.com/epik/posts/44196461

You might already know about since it is an important topic and I think you already are on Gab.

It could be argued that 3 decades of DNS protocol has left itself vulnerable to replacement. There are many security risks associated with DNS, as well as the social risks we have recently seen with censorship and registries calling domain owners "scalpers."

The infrastructure to replace DNS may not be the hardest part, mainstream adoption would be, and with decentralized protocols quickly gaining traction as well as investment it is hard to say, "there will never be a replacement to the current DNS."

 

[Rob Monster]

LOL. "He that lieth down with dogs shall rise up with fleas"

I guess we can't count on you for prison ministry for anytime soon. That's really too bad because there are a lot of confused and angry people that need to channel their energy more productively.

I am doing my part. For example:

Of course when it comes to SPLC, no good deed goes unpunished. They lifted one quote out of a 2 hour impromptu livestream and built a narrative around it.

 

[Internet.Domains]

Well, the IoT Smart City vision is very much counting on IPv6. As such, you can bet that when 5G shows up in your neighborhood, IPv6 will be right there with it.

The emerging doomsday scenario for Netizens is that it lines up with social credit and facial recognition. And indeed that is already live in China. More here if anyone not familiar:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09...el-citizen-in-a-digital-dictatorship/10200278

Decentralized Blockchain DNS is certainly a worthy project. However, the fundamental question is who decides what is allowed and not allowed on the Internet. Even Tor networks are full of bias.

In case you censorship is a small issue, I can assure anyone here that it is not. The Southern Poverty Law Center added me to their Hatewatch last week. You can see that here:

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/01/11/problem-epik-proportions

As you can see, the very reasonable act of defending lawful free speech is being characterized as an act of hate. It is simply civil liberty.

When it comes to solving the problem of who decides what is on the public Internet, Blockchain is no panacea. I wish them well, but until there is incontrovertible evidence of benevolent intent, I am a skeptic.

So to sum up, some possible emerging choices for the internet are:

1. Global control grid where a central monolith determines who connects and what they can do. (e.g. China model gone global)

2. Blockchain Decentralized Internet with unknown governance implications. (e.g. Handshake)

3. Continuation of the existing Public DNS supplemented by private wide area networks with private governance.

In case it is not obvious, for now, I am betting on option #3.

What's intriguing about #2, a blockchain decentralized internet, is that the only governance would be law, not Terms of Service designed by centralized organizations such as registries, registrars and ICANN.

Currently, under DNS, we are held by law and 3 tiers of ToS. This is extremely inefficient and can cause distress in many areas due to abusive ToS. One could use Gab.com as an example.

Under a blockchain decentralized internet the domain owner would bypass 3 tiers of ToS and only need to adhere to the laws that currently govern society, thus making it a more "fair" system.

Owning and controlling a domain with "HANDSHAKE" would only give more control to the owner making the ownership more valuable. With the proposed "handshake" a person or entity would own the domain, not "rent" the domain as the current DNS structure allows.

Blockchain decentralized internet could be a game changer and offer many benefits to domain investors.

 

[Internet.Domains]

I wonder how “name” without a (.) would stand up to name.com? I’d say it’s no contest. At the end of the day we’re dealing with the internet and companies need to be found.

Consumers would obviously need to be aware, but potentially we could see:

"Name/" vs. "Name.com"

"Name/" would be completely owned and controlled by the owner with a private key. "Name.com" is leased with pages of ToS.

A blockchain decentralized internet could bring great opportunity to early domain investors.