The situation where I can just wget the DNS would surely be preferable to the current pretense of "must publish your personal info, but that's ok because we make it a hassle to get the bulk data". It's no less centralized though because I presume you're still talking about getting the data automatically from some tree-shaped upstream. And yes, I think @spyked has it and it would all be a non-issue if the upstream didn't suck so much.

> An issue with just using IP addresses is the lack of meaningful or interesting names.

This seems to be a variant of my first "customary answer", and with the same reply. I can put what I please on my page titles and URL paths and you can put what you please in your bookmarks, as is already the case; where's the trouble?

> The current structure prioritizes privacy over authenticity, but truly provides neither.

What do you mean there by authenticity?

> This distinction between living and dead technically exists in all human interaction, but isn't generally thought of that way,

This I don't follow - thought of what way? Are you saying the distinction on this axis of liveness between reading Plato and reading a fresh love note is a technicality? If one actor is dead then whatever you're doing with them is not interaction.

> and it's questionable whether this is good or bad for a technology to acknowledge

Not sure I know what it means for a technology to acknowledge something - perhaps you mean, to model? I don't see where I was proposing it should be, even, more that it could be just another instance of updating links based on a change in topology, if that weren't such a pain to do.

> It would be lessened by archival and request being indistinguishable, as they should be.

If you mean streamlining the process of archiving, such as a browser with a one-click save feature - or even zero-click, if there's a usable way to prune the pile - then I can see it. If you mean a sort of National Archives of the Internet such that nobody's links ever break then I dunno... depends on having a good enough nation I guess.

> Isn't the issue here that sufficiency for routing necessarily involves where something happens to be at a time, whereas an identifier usually relies on some form of indirection?

Something like that.

> I question whether a meaningful global network can exist without some middleman akin to a postal system.

Well a postal system is a kind of network, and communication is always mediated by something, so this much seems obvious.

> the only reason I use the Internet is its freeing me from this, so I may have conversations with and read from others nowhere near me

The Internet is hardly the first or only thing to allow communication across distance, you know?

This distinction between living and dead technically exists in all human interaction, but isn't generally thought of that way, and it's questionable whether this is good or bad for a technology to acknowledge. It would be lessened by archival and request being indistinguishable, as they should be.

>I've begun to suspect the "IP address" is a poor abstraction from the start. It's insufficiently concrete to enable the machines to actually deliver a packet to the recipient, without a whole extra layer of routing protocols ultimately subject to the same "DNS problems"; yet it's insufficiently abstract to be useful to people as a long-term identifier.
Isn't the issue here that sufficiency for routing necessarily involves where something happens to be at a time, whereas an identifier usually relies on some form of indirection? I question whether a meaningful global network can exist without some middleman akin to a postal system. I could broadcast to those around me, and the structure of the global network could come to more closely resemble that of the globe, but the only reason I use the Internet is its freeing me from this, so I may have conversations with and read from others nowhere near me, and a meshnet doesn't seem suitable for this.

Perhaps this comment will have provided some value.

it seems to me that IPs work equally well or poorly in each of those examples so perhaps I'm missing the point of the question.

They don't, otherwise nobody would need public/private keypairs. And even those aren't especially good at identifying actual persons, more along the lines of whatever pieces of text one can associate with a signature belonging to a person... or something along these lines.

My point is that you can't (or at least I'm not aware that you can) use a single means to identify all things on the Internet, unless you're willing to buy into the IPv6 "IoT" story, that everyone and their dog should own a few IP addresses. I for one don't buy into that, I think IPs were designed to identify individual machines and networks. Sure, you can't talk to The Tar Pit simply by going to 82.79.58.192, you also need to GET the full URL that includes the site's name, which creates a problem, but IMHO that's a slightly different issue, arising from the perversion of HTTP and DNS. However, vhosts have nothing to do with DNS per se, as I can still expose my very own google.com through my Apache config and anyone can access it.

isn't that how most p2p networks work?

That depends on the particular P2P network we're talking about. Bittorrent identifies files, Bitcoin does transactions, but there's no mechanism for identifying arbitrary things, say, two consecutive paragraphs of text on a web page (which is why we have the whole MP-WP selection story). When you're making things (as opposed to, say, taking whatever nature provides), there's no escaping specification, so whatever it is you're going to want to identify on the Internet, you're going to have to specify it beforehand. This is, to my eye, how we've ended up with the current mess: through systematically-repeated ad-hoc specification of various things, some of which aren't even actual things (really, Facebook, "pages"?).

why are we participating in DNS at all?

I guess it seemed like a good idea at the time and now most of the software we have uses it, same as with TCP, JavaScript and all those other piles of machinery. I'm fairly sure that the whole thing could be easily discarded for the cost of a public register of name-IP associations á la deedbot's deed mechanism, but without a political organization to push it...

The question is: a long-term identifier for what precisely? for persons? websites? the "Things" in that "IoT" buzzword?

Persons primarily, then whatever they wish to use them for; it seems to me that IPs work equally well or poorly in each of those examples so perhaps I'm missing the point of the question.

I dare say that a unified/uniform identification scheme is not possible, simply on the grounds that I haven't yet seen one that actually works that way.

Now I am indeed confused because if by "that way" you mean "with user-generated identifiers independent of the physical topology" then... isn't that how most p2p networks work?

One point I missed is that once you're good enough to have your own address space and get ISPs to publish the route, IP in fact does work that way, so perhaps all I have here is a kind of "argument from poverty".

Say, the IP address works quite well as an identifier for machines,

If this is so then it would seem to knock out my "strongest answer" and leave the original burning question of: why are we participating in DNS at all?

On a final side note: I've begun to suspect the "IP address" is a poor abstraction from the start. It's insufficiently concrete to enable the machines to actually deliver a packet to the recipient, without a whole extra layer of routing protocols ultimately subject to the same "DNS problems"; yet it's insufficiently abstract to be useful to people as a long-term identifier.

The question is: a long-term identifier for what precisely? for persons? websites? the "Things" in that "IoT" buzzword? It's not clear what sort of resources on the Internet you're referring to, I dare say that a unified/uniform identification scheme is not possible, simply on the grounds that I haven't yet seen one that actually works that way.

I don't find this IP thing to be that much of a problem, to be honest: over time I am going to change my phone number, my Bitcoin addresses, my IP addresses and a whole other set of things, some of which identify other things. Say, the IP address works quite well as an identifier for machines, and no, it doesn't really need DNS in order to work, and if I really need to use names, /etc/hosts is right there and not even The Mother of Poettering can take it away from me.