Absolutely. However, I guess the question I was asking is, if AXFR of
the ROOT zone was done as a matter of course, say on by resolvers, would
the increased TCP load be sustainable at the public facing nodes? or
would it be better to split the provision into public facing
authoritative server and public facing XFR provider?
If the XFR is a few seconds late, there is little consequence (esp given
the time it takes IANA to make changes), but if the standard provision
is a few seconds late it has undesirable consequences.
probably also AS112
On 18/05/2012 03:47, paul vixie wrote:
On 5/16/2012 10:04 AM, Simon Munton wrote:
I agree - I also think a formal documented infrastructure of first&
second level ROOT slaves could be useful to spread the load - similar
to NTP?
i hope we won't go that far. there's good reason why HOSTS.TXT is dead.
but doing this for just the root zone, inside of otherwise
recursive-only servers, has a high perceived benefit and low perceived
cost, for most recursive server operators.
google dns and opendns both do it; the people involved tell me that this
saves on total transaction time for dns lookups, and 'feels more
resilient' than sending queries to root name servers.
especially given that most root server responses are negative, in ways
that aren't cacheable today.
_______________________________________________
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
