>
> Interesting results Bill. Could you give a little bit more detail
> about the "untested" servers? Are these servers that didn't respond to
> your probing? Or refused those probes? Or are they broken NS records: eg
> non-existent hostnames, names which resolve to impossible IP addresses?
> Or are they lame servers?
>
> It's a bit disturbing to find that you were unable to test ~30% of the
> name servers under .com. Though if that's an indication of the level
> of brokenness of that domain, it wouldn't surprise me. In fact it
> suggests .com is in better shape than expected. :-)
>
untested - ~700 responded :: unable to discriminate version
the rest - timed out. I was impatient :)
--bill
.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html
