ebersman> Actually, it's a great argument for longer TTLs and caching ebersman> doing what they're supposed to.
jim> It would be if the root only got queries from well behaved jim> recursive resolvers. But we both know Paul that simply isn't true. jim> Well over 90% of the query traffic at the root has no reason to be jim> going there at all. For instance stub resolvers that don't care jim> about TTLs or do any sort of caching, Chrome's 10-character nonce jim> strings to detect NXDOMAIN rewriting, CPE querying for .home, jim> enterprises leaking queries for .corp, etc, etc. You cut off the last line of my post: ebersman> But compared to a large corp DNS server farm, the root servers ebersman> shovel a lot of bits. Some of it even valid DNS queries and ebersman> responses. ;) Yes. Most of it is crap and the normal DNS rules don't apply. But TTLs and caching do help (less with root than TLD due to garbage problem) and the orders of magnitude differences in size of traffic between root/TLD and large recursive farms is still valid. We started this with "what's a lot of traffic" and I think you and I would agree defining "lots" is very dependent on what DNS role you play. And we've both been around long enough to agree that even if well behaved and well designed DNS start shifting to local root and similar, there's enough just crap and enough legacy/old folks needing traditional root that we're going to be upgrading the traditional root architecture for a long long time. But every bit helps, so local root, saner TTLs, solid caching layer are all still worth building as well. _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list dns-operations@lists.dns-oarc.net https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations