EFFECT OF ALTERNATE DNS ROOTS WITH AUTHOURITATIVE DNS Roots: INTERNET STABILITY.

EFFECT OF ALTERNATE DNS ROOTS WITH AUTHOURITATIVE DNS Roots: INTERNET STABILITY.

DNS root servers can be said to be one of the key elements which back the functionality of the internet. Authoritative root is the official root with legal backing for internet reliability and stability. This authoritative roots server is managed by the Internet Assigned Name and Authority (IANA) and its technicalities while ICANN (Internet corporation for Assigned Name and Number) oversees the huge and complex interconnected network of unique identifier that allow computer on the internet to found one another.

There is a saying that only 13 root servers exist, “there are not 13 roots servers but hundreds of servers existed over 130 physical locations in different countries”. (ICANN, 2007). This simply means that these servers is a technical design limitation means 13 is a practical maximum to the number of authoritative in the delegation of data for root zone, range alphabetically from a.root to m.root server.

Alternate DNS root is a root servers established and operated by private organisation offering their own Top Level Domain (TLD). It operates and administers their own name space. These organisations either run it internally for their own use, for profit making and for ideological reasons (Wiki, 2013).Example of the organisation that run alternative DNS roots are Mobile TLD, Name.Space, NewNations, OpenNic, ORSN, AlterNic, Shofar. Domain, Namecoin, Global-Anycast, Cesidian root etc.

Some of the organizations who practice or operate alternate root servers will be examined and it motive of operating alternative root server.  AlterNIC, it was created by Eugene Kashpureff in 1995 with the aim of enhancing the internet with new information services and to challenge the official DNS root server (Monopoly of Internic) until the formation of Internet Corporation for Assigned Name and Number (ICANN). Alternic offered second level of domain registration in its own top level domain at a low price compared to the Internic price. However, its name server were not included in the internet official root zone which resulted that only reconfigured name servers were able to resolve Alternic Name. It was unofficial alternative DNS root which ceased operation in 1997. Eugene Kashpureff started alt roots immediately Notational Science Foundation mandated every network solution (NSI) and private organisation to begin levy the registrants and annual fees and aimed to provide new information to company to differentiate themselves from other companies because internet user are tired of limited domain .com and .org and the scarcity ICANN maintained to passed into law other top level domains, (Wiki, 2013).

OpenNic is another organisation that practices alt roots server which abides not by the consensus policies. “It is a non-profit organisation, democratic body which is run by volunteers” (OpenNIC no date) which does not require money or charge to have access to its name spaces. The intention of OpenNic is to make internet free and open to all which means that no organisation, Government and individual own the internet, however, it was created or design and intended to be free. This organisation allow internet user submit a request for top level domain that suit them but its hosted domain are not reachable by the large of internet users. Some of the top level domain offered includes .bbs, .dyn, .free, .fur, .geek and lot more. In order to access openic network, the internet user need to subscribe to its name server or change it setting to meet the alt roots name servers.

There are many views floating on internet or among the various stakeholders about the stability and reliability of internet if there exits multiple public DNS root servers. This paper shall try to look at effect of having authoritative DNS root with Alternative DNS root on internet functionality.

The Internet Architecture Board had spoken strongly against having multiple public roots because having a multiple public root we jeopardise the stability and reliability of the internet but having a unique public name space will bring about its proper coordination. This does not prevent organisation that want to have their own private name space (IAB, 2000).

A single root server needed a common set of symbol and semantic interpretation to have effective communication which brings about uniqueness, otherwise, results to failure in communication. Another point raised is the coordination of updates which may be difficulties when there is a move to update the protocol embedded in the hundreds of million computers and this will not be easy to support shared domain scenario and in the aspect of security, the domain name root will have a great challenge on how to coordinate its security due to multiple public DNS root and different bodies involved in managing it but if it is a single root, this will be easier to see to the affair and issue facing the root servers. (IAB, 2000). 

The people in favour of authoritative root servers believed that to sustain the future of internet stability and its reliability, there should be only a single root server and if there exist multiple public root servers, this might bring conflict or damper the internet furfure.  A global or central unique number should be encouraged in order to bring about the universal resolvability and make DNS on the internet unique. Imagine if IP address is not globally unique or coordinated, these could  cause havoc and therefore make internet unreliable where message intend for user A is deliver to user B. (InterNic 2002).

“To remain a global network, the internet required existence of only a single root or global unique public name space” (IAB, 2000), to justify this statement, the world needs a public name space that is unique and coordinated by a unique authority to avoid ambiguity and make internet reliable and to prevent confusion in its operation. If internet users enter a web page address will be mapped to the correct ip address and no other ip address.

Having a shared or multiple root servers would cause the internet user to lose their trust on anything pertaining to internet issue, experience difficulties when trying to reach web page after so much effort to build services which determine the functionalities of the organisation or send an e-mail to a destination A and nothing happen or deliver to destination B the message intend for destination A, and this is why trying to protect single roots server stability. The essence of the Internet Name Assigned Authority (IANA), Internet Corporation for Assigned Name and Number (ICANN) and stakeholders in favour of maintaining single roots system is toward an agreement globally, of maintaining a single roots server for Domain name system

Internet as a whole still operating under a single root server called official root server, many internet user still find internet in-secure and user is still in doubt of privacy on the internet talk less of having a multiple or shared root servers might increase the doubt of internet users the more.

Alternative root servers abide not by the consensus policies followed by the internet community and the stakeholders, which endanger the stability and functionality of the internet. The potential problem which could be caused by alternate root server is the overlapping of top level domain between official root and alt root, where there can be replication of name space, and this can cause registrants to be very annoyed for seeing his brand name used by another services and lack of trust.

The internet user might not able to get to another user on the internet, reason been that there is no link between them because alt roots is not included in the official DNS roots, however, the user might not know that he/she is limited but thought that can reach everybody on the internet and have access not to universal resolvability but all the highlighted points can be experience only if alt root servers grow more than expected or having multiple public roots server without relationship between the DNS roots system. (InterNIC, 2002)

Supporting the above point, to prevent confusion and internet stability, having single roots with effective policies will be a great ideal but ‘it has never been demonstrated that having a single root server system is the only way out to ensure internet stability and prevent conflict’ (Vittora, no date). There is no problem if there exist multiple root servers and all the pointers point to the same place whereby is been managed by different entities rather than centralised body in term of corporative where they share services. The only negligible problem that might occur is when the “uniqueness of the pointer breaks and different roots server point different internet user asking for the same name and redirect them to different name”, (Vittora, no date). The aim of having multiple root servers is to promote decentralized internet network, competitive market where user have choice to pick which root sever to use and to bring check and balance on the management of each root server systems. 

In conclusion, with the argument of having a centralise or decentralised internet root servers system will only be possible if former advantages weigh more than the later and vice versa. A single root server arguments is to prevent confusion in the internet domain name space and its stability ensuring universal resolvability while alt roots craving for having a decentralised root server with free will to choose and manage by different bodies, therefore, still maintaining the internet stability. The internet functionality, reliability and stability would only depend on the sets of rule existing between the DNS root server systems if multiple roots server is embraced. I believe there is nothing that is not possible underneath the earth, if the issue of alt roots continue posing serious challenges on authoritative DNS root server and achieve critical mass, there should be a way of splitting the single root server that it won’t affect the internet operability and its stability. Meanwhile, ICANN, operating on Internet Community consensus has nothing to fear of competing DNS roots. If alternative DNS root, single roots or both is in agreement with internet community consensus, should be encourage to avoid internet fragmentation, if not the result is otherwise.

Cheers!!!!

 

References.

Alternic Wikipedia  [2013]. “Alt roots organisation”.

Crispin, K. [2001] Internet-draft Alt Roots, Alt-TLDs,” may 2001.

Dr.Milton L.Mueller, Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just a Plain Destruction

ICANN Blog [2007] “There are not 13 root servers.”

ICANN, GTISC, DNS-OARC, GMU, Alanta, Georgia, USA [2009] “The Global DNS Security, Stability and Resilience Symposium,” February 2009.

ICANN [2001] “A unique Authoritative root DNS.”

InterNIC [2002] “The Domain Name System: A non-technical explanation why universal resolvability is important”.

OpenNIC Project [no date] “Alt root Organisation”.

Internet Architecture Board [2000] “IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS root.” The Internet Society, May, 2000.

Postel, J. [1996] “New Registries and Delegation of International Top Level Domain,” IETF Internet-Draft [june].

Vittoria Bertola [no date] “Oversight and multiple root server system”.

Wikipedia [2013] “Alternative DNS root”.