Joe, On May 16, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Joe Abley wrote: > Right now we have a root server system that is measurable,
While I would agree that it would be more measurable, I'm not convinced that it actually is more measured. > Ad-hoc distribution of root zone operation to an unbounded set of operators > would result in a system that was much more challenging to measure, that was > operated by people whose focus was (properly) elsewhere, and with whom > reliable communication was probably not possible. Ignoring the fact that anyone can set themselves up as a root zone operator now, I believe there are more options than either 12 XOR infinity. For example, one could imagine a subscription-type of system where in order to "join the club" and get a TSIG key to a particular server or (say) NOTIFYs of zone updates, you have to agree to share name server stats, agree to have a 24x7 contact, etc. Other models are, of course, feasible. > I am generally in favour of decentralisation, but in this specific instance I > can't see much benefit to offset the deficiencies. Let's spell this out. Benefits I see: - increased resilience to DoS attack - reduced dependence on a single point (ok, 13 points) of failure - potentially improved performance - greater autonomy - reduced political whinage about not having a root server - greater openness and transparency Deficiencies I see: - reduced opportunities of control (could be argued to be a benefit) - reduction in theoretical measurement points - potentially reduce performance if a mirror is operated poorly What are the benefits and deficiencies you see? Regards, -drc _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
