One M$ to rule them all

Proof positive that M$ thinks they (can) own the Net.
mdf@monk:~$ host -t ns microsoft.commicrosoft.com name server ns5.msft.net.microsoft.com name server ns1.msft.net.microsoft.com name server ns2.msft.net.microsoft.com name server ns3.msft.net.microsoft.com name server ns4.msft.net.mdf@monk:~$ dig @ns1.msft.net . soa; <<>> DiG 9.3.2 <<>> @ns1.msft.net . soa; (1 server found);; global options:  printcmd;; Got answer:;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 13257;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1-------------^^;; QUESTION SECTION:;.                              IN      SOA;; ANSWER SECTION:.                       3600    IN      SOA     ns1.msft.net. msnhst.microsoft.com. 2006032873 3600 600 604800 3600;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:ns1.msft.net.           3600    IN      A       207.68.160.190;; Query time: 21 msec;; SERVER: 207.68.160.190#53(207.68.160.190);; WHEN: Wed Nov 29 22:22:22 2006;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 101

Namespace hijacking redux

There's been alot of buzz on the NANOG list as of late, regarding the "new" DNS resolution service from a company/site called OpenDNS.

There are many comparisons being made to Sitefinder, and optimistic distinctions such as "this is better because it's voluntary". Well as Steve Bellovin pointed out, it is not voluntary because the choice to use it will be made, in most cases, by enterprise & ISP adminstrators and not the end-users.

I can only ask what the "open" in opendns is, and how is this venture not ripe for corruption.

Corruptable because they will in essence be circumventing openness by hijacking portions of the namespace for what boils down to greed - this is for-profit entity after all! Follow the $$$!

The irony is, OpenDNS states "We're going to put more control in your hands" - yeah right!javascript:void(0)