On 18 Sep 2016, at 14:10, John Levine wrote:
4.2.4. Name Collision in the DNS ...
This study is from before the new gTLD program. The assumption in
report need to be tested against what actually happened in the round
new gTLDs before it can be included as part of the fact basis for
work. We also need information on the degree of success that the
various mitigation strategies had in overcoming possible problems to
have a full picture of the problem as it has been shown in practice.
At a meeting a couple of weeks ago, I believe that someone said that
the junk traffic at the roots for each of .corp, .home and .mail still
greatly exceeds all of the traffic for the new gTLDs. So I think it's
safe to say none of the mitigation strategies have worked.
There is a difference between "mitigation" with "prevention". Few of use
thought that publicity about upcoming collisions would have cause more
than a few folks to fix the problem before it hit them.
The wildcard 127.0.53.53 and such are clever, but none of the domains
that have been delegated had significant collision issues to start
with so it's hard to argue they've been effective.
It is impossible to measure the effectiveness without knowing how many
collision queries are just noise (queries that will cause no noticeable
damage if they started coming back with results). In the case of
mitigation through wildcard-to-localhost, it is safe to assume that many
organizations did in fact mitigate; we simply can't tell how many or
(Disclaimer: I'm now on ICANN staff, but well before I was, I wrote
"Guide to Name Collision Identification and Mitigation for IT
Professionals" for ICANN.)
DNSOP mailing list