How would you go about creating a Decentralised-DNS?

[NyeFe]

I've been thinking about this lately for some reason. Without POW.

How would you actually implement a DDNS network?


Of course you would have a local database so each node can store its own list (domain_name + IP_addresses + "some sort of RSA public key"). But when a name is being registered in this sort of network, how would prevent evil_nodes from modifying and propagating bad values for (IP or domain_name) to other nodes?

What about when two domain_names, of the same value & different IP, are being added to the network at the same time, how would select which one to use, if you can't even rely on time of creation, since it can be forged?


Has anyone got any starting point on this?

[cloverme]

Many a year ago, someone tried to get P2P dns going. People were tired of ICANN control over TLD's and such... the anger went away and the need for P2P dns kind of died with it.  Plus, DNS is so heavily integrated into so many products, services, and core infrastructure, it needs a lot of support.  Today's passion turned into yesterday's "too much work" and it died on the vine.  I think the group is involved in Tor these days.

Edit: You can read about it here:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/211969/p2pbased_alternative_to_dns_hopes_to_challenge_icann.html

[Bitcoin Explorer]

This is quite interesting. I think this is where smart contracts would be useful? Perhaps counterparty?

[AlgoSwan]

How about NMC on this issue?

[cloverme]

How about NMC on this issue?

I was thinking the same thing, but then OP said "without POW" which would exclude namecoin. ICANN has an iron grip on the TLD's, I think they tired to be more friendly by "allowing" a bunch of new TLD's over the last couple of years. I don't see any reason why DNS couldn't be adapted to a crypto-dns model, but it would have to be ipv4 and ipv6 compatible.

[NyeFe]

How about NMC on this issue?

I was thinking the same thing, but then OP said "without POW" which would exclude namecoin. ICANN has an iron grip on the TLD's, I think they tired to be more friendly by "allowing" a bunch of new TLD's over the last couple of years. I don't see any reason why DNS couldn't be adapted to a crypto-dns model, but it would have to be ipv4 and ipv6 compatible.

Hi cloverme If you have any more ideas i would love to see them. I was actually looking at some sort of consensus based DNS, where nodes with the most valid/up to date records are voted on, and selected to update records within the network.

[idev]

What about...

DNSChain aims to fix web security by Man-in-the-Middle proofing connections. It's a secure, decentralized PKI (public key infrastructure) that makes blockchain tech (like Namecoin, Blockstore, etc.) usable for arbitrary devices

[NyeFe]

What about...

DNSChain aims to fix web security by Man-in-the-Middle proofing connections. It's a secure, decentralized PKI (public key infrastructure) that makes blockchain tech (like Namecoin, Blockstore, etc.) usable for arbitrary devices

Thats a great project.

I was looking at solutions that were more direct. Something any that can encapsulate P2P connections between users, where DDNS is used to map names to users IPv4/IPv6 address.

[joey.rich]

The internet's DNS system is already fairly decentralized - DNS servers are geographically diverse and anyone can set up a DNS server.  Good luck getting anyone to go through your DNS server unless you are an ISP though.

For a fully decentralized system, you could try something like Namecoin, then convince Apple, Microsoft, Google and the Linux community to modify Windows, iOS, Linux and Android to route DNS queries through this new network.  I think you would also need to work with Godaddy, Namecheap and all major webhosting companies so that everyone who currently owns domains can be given private keys so they retain control of their domains when the new network is rolled out.

In other words, it would be pretty hard!

[Patatas]

I would willingly help you provided you be more specific what you're trying to achieve ? The DDNS as discussed above is already fair enough,just follows centralized administration.If you're trying to give an unique identity for everybody on the network,there would be a entity which would solely be responsible for allocation the nodes.Don't think that's decentralization pretty much.Security concerns that would arise from the chain will be difficult to handle.