Pages that didn't make it into “How DNS Works”(jvns.ca)
jvns.ca
Pages that didn't make it into “How DNS Works”
https://jvns.ca/blog/2022/05/10/pages-that-didn-t-make-it-into--how-dns-works-/
14 comments
Note that this is not about https://howdns.works/, a short comic thing covering more or less the same content.
Not about this either unfortunately: https://bind.zone/
> I was extremely wrong about that and it turned out I needed all 28 pages to explain DNS.
You may need more as time goes on and IETF piles up one RFC on top of another: Herding the DNS camel (2018), https://www.ietf.org/blog/herding-dns-camel/
> I will say (as a disclaimer) that these pages aren't as cohesive as I usually like my zines to be and they definitely do not tell you everything you need to need to know to own a domain.
See also Bert Huber's Hello DNS, https://powerdns.org/hello-dns/
You may need more as time goes on and IETF piles up one RFC on top of another: Herding the DNS camel (2018), https://www.ietf.org/blog/herding-dns-camel/
> I will say (as a disclaimer) that these pages aren't as cohesive as I usually like my zines to be and they definitely do not tell you everything you need to need to know to own a domain.
See also Bert Huber's Hello DNS, https://powerdns.org/hello-dns/
https://jvns.ca/images/domain-extras/domain-expiry.png
RE: stage 3 - anyone can buy the domain now…
Isn’t this often not true? Don’t many domain registrars hold or buy the domain back for domains they perceive as having some higher value and try to resell at often ridiculous pricing?
Isn’t this often not true? Don’t many domain registrars hold or buy the domain back for domains they perceive as having some higher value and try to resell at often ridiculous pricing?
[deleted]
This blog makes the HN front page time after time after time, even when it has no content and is marketing a non-free e-zine. With that level of web traffic it is no wonder the author is trying to sell text.
I’m sorry, but what?
https://jvns.ca/categories/favorite/
No content is a pretty bold claim to make here I think.
https://jvns.ca/categories/favorite/
No content is a pretty bold claim to make here I think.
To clarify: I only mean this particular submission. Other submissions have contained content. With Javascript disabled, I could see any substantive content in this one, just a message about additional pages that have been added to a for sale "e-zine". Maybe I missed something. It seems like pages from some blogs end up on the HN front page again and again and again. The one hosted at utoronto.ca is another recent example. It makes me think the algorithm or voters are just selecting based on past reputation, not the actual content, as this "buy my e-zine" advertisement demonstrates. There is so much more variety of material that gets submitted to HN that never, ever reaches the front, not even for a moment. (We will never know what would happen if it did.) As such, HN contains a remarkably large amount of discussion-worthy material that never gets discussed. Meanwhile one can be sure we will see the next installment of some familiar blog, danfuu.com or whatever, on the front page, as well as constantly resubmitted submissions, even recycled ones that have already been discussed several times.
At this point it has 96 upvotes, so clearly some of us find the content useful!
Why even bring up SSL when no one uses it?
Informally, many people still refer to TLS as SSL. After all these years, "SSL certificate" seems like it is still the more popular term.
Cheeky. I love it!
SSL was the latest standard until 1999, when TLS 1.0 was released.
Per RFC 2246 [0], "The differences between this protocol [TLS 1.0] and SSL 3.0 are not dramatic, but they are significant enough to preclude interoperability between TLS 1.0 and SSL 3.0"
SSL/TLS Versions 1995-present: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security#Histo...
[0]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2246
SSL was the latest standard until 1999, when TLS 1.0 was released.
Per RFC 2246 [0], "The differences between this protocol [TLS 1.0] and SSL 3.0 are not dramatic, but they are significant enough to preclude interoperability between TLS 1.0 and SSL 3.0"
SSL/TLS Versions 1995-present: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security#Histo...
[0]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2246