<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Thank you for the link and the fine reading it makes.<br>
<br>
You make the point - the resolver is not the judge of the trust but
handles and interprets the information handed down the chain of
trust. It depends on the user whether to trust the institutions that
established the chain of trust in the first place. <br>
<br>
Thus if users place their trust in a blockchain then it perhaps
should not make a difference for a resolver to deal with the data
provided by such a blockchain.<br>
<br>
Scaling is certainly a differen aspect of it and perhaps depends
also on the data design also considering that
DNSSEC/DMARC/DKIM/TLSA/CAA records are not involved.<br>
But is it not that blockchain transaction ID (wallet) apps are
facing the same challenge and have to download the entire blockchain
first and keep it then current with the bits beig removed/added?<br>
<br>
Blockchain might not be the saviour for all mankind challenges, like
it is sometimes being promoted, but it is for the moment at least
something interesting to consider.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 14.12.2018 00:12, Paul Wouters
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:038657F9-CCC8-4153-8EA2-F9B12E7FDB4A@nohats.ca">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
The reason we designed DNS is that you cannot possibly store all
domains in the world locally. How do you think your solution
scales if you not only need to store all worldwide domains but
also their entire history ?
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I have written about this in the past,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a
href="https://nohats.ca/wordpress/blog/2012/04/09/you-cant-p2p-the-dns-and-have-it-too/"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://nohats.ca/wordpress/blog/2012/04/09/you-cant-p2p-the-dns-and-have-it-too/</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Paul<br>
<br>
<div id="AppleMailSignature" dir="ltr">Sent from mobile device</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
On Dec 13, 2018, at 16:58, ѽ҉ᶬḳ℠ via Unbound-users <<a
href="mailto:unbound-users@nlnetlabs.nl"
moz-do-not-send="true">unbound-users@nlnetlabs.nl</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
Hi<br>
<br>
If that has been discussed previously than I was not able to
trace it but being interested in whether there are plans to
resolve blockchain domains with Unbound?<br>
<br>
Thus far my understanding is that it would require:<br>
<ol>
<li>a transaction ID with the respective blockchain, and
then <br>
</li>
<li>the initial download of the entire current blockchain,
and</li>
<li>subsequent incremental downloads of the bits being
added/deleted to/from the blockchain</li>
</ol>
<p>The blockchain would contain the DNS for the domains and
also the security bits for each domain and thus there is
no root and no DNNSEC.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>