FlyingGuy's post is such a rambling, nonsensical rant i fear i may be being trolled.
To the grandparent: Yes, writing a DNSserver is that hard. The subtle complexities of the internet's directory service actual operations in the Real World is not trivial. The DNS system actually does more than you might think, and contains more record types than commonly understood.
Just upgrading DNS to support IPv6 was no trivial matter, and they actually got it wrong, first, with A6 records--it was decided that AAAA records were better.
I want to also point out that DNSSEC--cryptographic assurances applied to DNS--is a major step forward on fundamental DNS infrastructure, and implementing that is far from trivial. DNS is being tested at the root and major top-levels-domains even as i write this, and testing is planned to continue throughout 2010.
Finally, the data in the DNS is not at all consistent. The DNShas--realistically--over a million administrators. This is made possible by the delegation-hierarchy model of DNS, which works very well for a globally-scaled system. But it also means that strange-rule bending setups are out there... and dealing with all of them in some kind of consistent, reliable way is a major difficulty.
So again, writing a robust DNSserver is hard.
Oh, but FlyingGuy, back to your senseless musings: if DNSis such a bad system, can you name a superior alternative?
To all: DNSis a fine system, in constant, massive use on the internet with remarkable reliability, despite well-know targets of attack. It is incrementally being updated and advanced, with thoughtful and non-disruptive upgrades happening especially in the last 10 years. You can rely on DNS being around for another 30 years.