[ga] Re: Vint: on the basic rationale for adding TLDs and any contra-indications

[Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@xxxxxx>]

On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 11:39:18PM +0100,
 M. Morfin <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote 
 a message of 45 lines which said:

> Interesting computations (using RIPE and other serious sources
> published figures):

RIPE mentioned but no actual references given (as usual...)

> - If _every_and_more_ users (1 billion) got a copy of the root file 
> every month the root related traffic would _decrease_ by 90%.

The root zone (ftp://rs.internic.net/domain/root.zone.gz) is currently
63249 bytes (17166 bytes compressed with gzip --best). Even
compressed, this would be more than 17 terabytes. It seems a lot but
is is for the whole Internet where much more data moves every day. Of
course, BitTorrent could help :-)

But, anyway, comparing the size is not enough, the number of requests
is the real issue for the typical server program (as long as the files
/ requests are small). A typical root server receives 2k to 6k
requests per second (when no DoS attack is underway). See
http://k.root-servers.org/ (remember this is an anycasted node). 

The "mirroring" proposal (1 billion users download their copy every
month) would be 379 requests / second for the whole root system, which
is interesting.

But we would have more stale information (waiting one month to see an
update may be too much but it can be bearable since typical IANA
processing time is between two and seventeen months).

> - 70 updates of the root file a year. Hundred of thousands of
> downloaded copies not by far not always updated.

Not a problem at all: if they are loaded by BIND, the first thing the
name server does on startup is to download a fresh copy from one of
the root name servers in its "hint" file. 

Also, most of these copies are not used for name resolution but simply
for surveys or archiving (I do it since july 2003, for instance).

> Maybe 200 or more versions in use. ICANN is the primary (and only)
> alt-root.

BS

> - a stop of the root server system would address the bugs leading to
> 97.5% of illegitimate calls. The impact on the Internet usage could
> be low or nil: people would quickly learn from TV or friend's how to
> build themselves a fool proof config if
 
The telephone network works that way: every "international" PABX is
hardwired with the different countries. This what allows ITU to claim
there is no root in the telephone system.

So, this "mirroring" proposal completely misses the point and plays
with words. Technically, experts (the Morfin entity is not one of
them) could discuss if it is better to use the current DNS or some
external mirroring system to get the root: it is purely a technical
issue. The real crux of the matter is who controls and edits the root,
not how it is distributed.