[Opensim-dev] Suggested in-world DNS: .sim

[Dzonatas Sol]

If I took the viewpoint of someone that wants to maintain a grid server, 
I can understand why they would consider this a "stupid" idea, since it 
would obviously put in end to such grid service. You didn't want to 
state the obvious, yet decided to resort to name-calling.

If everything is peer-2-peer where each client runs it's own simulator, 
there would be no need for a grid server. It's foolish and stupid to 
consider people would only want to connect to a grid server. That's 
certainly not how reality works, so it would be stupid to expect that 
when simulated.

If clients have the hardware to run the simulator and viewer, there is 
no need for a grid server. All simulation updates can be shared peer to 
peer.

In fact, even less data would be sent from client to client due to the 
nature of each simulator being on each client and therefore no need for 
a server to constantly update a client.

There nothing that's gonna stop you from being able to use ".com" or 
such, but those aren't free and "open".

Mark Malewski wrote:
> I agree with Ted, it's just another useless TLD, and just another waste.
>
> There are plenty of TLD's, and another stupid TLD is meaningless.
>
> Nobody will use it, and it's just a waste. �I see no real benefit as well.
>
> Users could simply keep their current domain name, and just use a 
> "grid.domain.com <http://grid.domain.com>" no reason to create a whole 
> new domain name, just for the grid server. �You don't go out and get a 
> whole new domain name just for your mail server, so I can't imagine 
> why you'd need one for your grid server. �Seems foolish. �You can host 
> your web, mail, and grid all on your same domain. �No reason to put it 
> on a separate domain. �Makes no sense. �I see no real benefit as well. 
> �It makes more sense to just stick with the current 
> geographic/organizational structure that is currently in use. �No 
> reason for another silly TLD.
>
> �� � � � � � � Mark
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 3:09 AM, Tedd Hansen <tedd at konge.net 
> <mailto:tedd at konge.net>> wrote:
>
>     Hi
>
>     pop.domain.us <http://pop.domain.us>
>     smtp.domain.co.uk <http://smtp.domain.co.uk>
>     mail.domain.fr <http://mail.domain.fr>
>     www.domain.de <http://www.domain.de>
>     ns1.domain.es <http://ns1.domain.es>
>     sql.domain.com <http://sql.domain.com>
>     domain.sim
>
>     One doesn't fit. :)
>     Currently internet is built on a system where TLD's being allocated to
>     geographic/organizational relation, and subdomains are
>     server(service)-specific. Even more so as they are considering
>     adding TLD's
>     for cities as well (to loosen up competition for domain names).
>
>     Private networks such as I2P use their own TLD because the service
>     offered
>     is geographically unknown, doesn't reside on a fixed IP and should
>     *really*
>     not be resolvable from the internet.
>
>     I see a whole lot of misunderstandings, technical difficulties,
>     etc. in
>     adding it. And no benefits.
>
>     BR,
>     �Tedd
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>     <mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de>
>     [mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>     <mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de>] On Behalf Of
>     Dzonatas Sol
>     Sent: 24. februar 2010 00:44
>     To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de <mailto:opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de>
>     Subject: [Opensim-dev] Suggested in-world DNS: .sim
>
>     One of the natures of the internet is for alternate backbones. This
>     feature is rarely used, but easily to add through hosts definition
>     files
>     and DNS hops. After enough people agree to use these new alternate
>     backbones, then they could be proposed to IANA for more static
>     backbone
>     networks.
>
>     If you are familiar with freenode, you probably already understand how
>     some of this works.
>
>     With opensim, I wanted to suggest a new TLD: .sim
>
>     That way simulators can easily find each other based on name/host
>     resolutions. This could lead to more dynamic region presence.
>
>     In one sense, it would basically mean to drop a DNS/BIND server into
>     opensim. I'm sure people in-world would like their own "in-world
>     internet" to work beyond simulators even if the simulator isn't
>     bordered
>     on the physical sides on the other simulator.
>
>     IPv6 if you will...
>     _______________________________________________
>     Opensim-dev mailing list
>     Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de <mailto:Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de>
>     https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Opensim-dev mailing list
>     Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de <mailto:Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de>
>     https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>