CORRECTION Re: [ga] A Root with a view...

[Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just want tomake a correction to a statement I made below in which I 
accused ICANN of misleading.  That is not true.  This data is simply an 
analysis from ICANN that makes no claims.  This may have been done for 
the purpose of appeasing us, but in the end the only one using the data 
to mislead was stephane.  And I don't think that was in any way 
intentional.  This was pointed out to me in another conference where the 
data is being viewed.

In my opinion stephane saw the data and got excited that it proved a 
point in her argument against Karls "boutique" TLDs when in fact it did 
not as L.root data is not very reflective of traffic patterns in the 
roots due to the reasons given in my reply below. 

kindest regards
joe baptista

Joe Baptista wrote:

> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> > I cannot find another report about the TLDs most often queried at a
> > root name server. Other reports I've seen aggregated data, while this
> > small glimpse, however partial, at least *names* the TLDs.
> >
> > It has been said sometimes that dummy (sorry, Karl, "boutique" TLDs)
> > were present in requests to the root name servers. This is clearly
> > false, all the non-existing TLDs queried are local domains (such as
> > Apple's ".local"), leaking through a configuration error.
> >
> > http://blog.icann.org/?p=240
> >  
>
> Thanks for that Stephane.  It would look to me like things are getting 
> better.  This root where the data originates seems to get less errors 
> then that reported in 2003 which data mainly came from f.root.
>
> Thats a significant improvement however after careful inspection we 
> begin to see the flaws in this data.  If this were f.root data then I 
> would be very impressed.  Because the data would show a significant 
> decrease in error traffic.  That would be amazing.  In fact the data 
> looks alot like that I have seen for public roots I have setup.  Like 
> the one now used in Turkey.
>
> However this is data from the L.root run by ICANN and i'm not so 
> amazed anymore.  I speculate this is just a little bit of ICANN 
> nonsense designed to once again mislead the public.  Shame.
>
> Now the problem as I see it here is that this data is very limited in 
> scope.  I don't dispute the first chart on popular TLDs.  What i'm 
> interested to see are the popular TLDs that result in errors 
> (NXDOMAIN) as per the original 2003 report methodology.
>
> Next there is nothing in the data that states the number of queries 
> received at the root servers.  Only percentages are used in the 
> metrics.  The articles I wrote
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/02/05/dud_queries_swamp_us_internet/
>
> show us that CAIDA conducted an analysis on 152 million messages.  
> This data was obtained from f.root.  f.root is one of the oldest roots 
> on the net while l.root is one of the newest.  In fact if as per the 
> ICANN blog this data was collected on November 26 then it would of 
> come from IP 199.7.83.42 that was implemented on 1 November 2007 and 
> replaced the previous IP address of 198.32.64.12.
>
> http://l.root-servers.org/ip-change-26nov07.htm
>
> The data is unclear if it was collected from 199.7.83.42 or 
> 198.32.64.12.  In any case what is certain is that both versions of 
> the L.root run by ICANN are very new and that means the amount of 
> traffic to them would be very low in comparison to f.root - which in 
> my opinion provides a more accurate reflection of traffic patterns on 
> the net.
>
> So in conclusion is this data in any way reflective of the impact of 
> Karl, "boutique" TLDs?  The answer in this case would be NO.  It is 
> however reflective of the data one would associate with a recently 
> launched root server that few people are yet dependent on.
>
> Hope my comments help you interpret the data.
>
> kindest regards
> joe baptista


--
Joe Baptista                                www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive,
Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Office: +1 (202) 517-1593
    Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

begin:vcard
fn:Joe Baptista
n:Baptista;Joe
org:PublicRoot Consortium
adr:;;963 Ford Street;Peterborough;Ontario;K9J 5V5 ;Canada
email;internet:baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
title:PublicRoot Representative
tel;fax:+1 (509) 479-0084 
tel;cell:+1 (416) 912-6551
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.publicroot.org
version:2.1
end:vcard