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, johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com, 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
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf