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

[Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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