Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

[John Levine <[e-mail]>]

>> the junk. Conversely, if root server traffic is an issue,
>> getting networks to clean up their DNS traffic would be much
>> more effective than limiting the number of TLDs.

> While I find this interesting, I don't see much logical or statistical 
> justification for the belief that, if one increased (by a lot) the 
> number of TLDs, the amount of "invalid" traffic would remain roughly 
> constant, rather than increasing the multiplier.

As I recall from prior surveys, the invalid traffic is largely independent 
of valid domains, e.g., queries from RFC1918 space (4% of all traffic at 
one server), repeated queries for the same nonexistent name, dynamic rDNS 
updates from misconfigured Windows boxes, stuff like that.

> And, of course, two of the ways of having "networks [to] clean
> up their DNS traffic" depend on local caching of the root zone
> (see previous note) and filtering out root queries for
> implausible domains.  Both of those are facilitated by smaller
> root zones and impeded by very large ones.

Oh, I agree.  But I really don't think there's much point in worrying 
about root zones with millions of domains.  Nothing ICANN is likely to do 
would raise it above thousands, and a zone with a few thousand entries 
should be well within the capacity of any DNS server.

Regards,
John Levine, [e-mail], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf