Re: [DNSOP] AS112 for TLDs

[[e-mail]]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 07:37:31AM -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2008, at 7:02 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 02:16:32PM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
> >>> 	er, it (the bogus ttraffic) still reaches the root.
> >>> 	just your copy of the root, not mine.
> >> 	Yep.  This should be seen as a good thing.  The information
> >> 	leakage to the root servers is enormous.
> > This sounds to me like a cure that is quite possibly worse than the
> > disease.
> 
> In what way?

	Mark made the claim that a local copy of the root would stop the
	traffic, which is false. a local copy of the root simply diffuses
	the traffic.

	the down sides to local copies of the root as seen from the 
	peanut gallery:

	) coherence of the avowed single namespace.  There have been
	  a few threads over the past decade on "bit rot" in the root-hints
	  data.  Local copies of the root zone will have the same bit-rot
	  characteristics
	) the IANA sanctioning alternate roots/namespaces ... "let a 
	  thousand roots bloom..." 
	) just how is the poor application/end user supposed to know 
	  or discriminate some local, walled garden root varient from
	  the one true ICANN root varient?

	but you, no doubt, see a much clearer picture.  please convince
	me that my doubts are groundless... that bit-rot won't happen,
	that the avowed single namespace will remain intact, and that
	there will be trival ways for end users to discover the root of
	the namespace they are using...   if the recommendation to run
	your own copy of the root is approved.

--bill
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop